id
stringlengths 4
7
| query
stringlengths 166
33.3k
| answer
stringclasses 3
values | choices
sequencelengths 3
3
| gold
int64 0
2
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
FMD1400 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Is the 'Blue Whale' Game Responsible for Dozens of Suicides in Russia? Claim summaries: Although certain game groups on social media have been accused of promoting suicide, they have not been found to have directly caused an uptick in young people taking their own lives.
contextual information: In February 2017, English-language websites caught wind of a purported "suicide game" that had reportedly resulted in more than a hundred deaths in Russia. The general premise of the game, which goes by several names but is commonly referred to as the "blue whale" game, is as follows: The player signs up to play the game and agrees to follow instructions over the course of 50 days. An administrator assigns a series of tasks (anything from cutting oneself to listening to a song) that the player must accomplish. The player wins when they complete the final task, committing suicide, on the 50th day. The claim that the "blue whale" suicide game (named after the way whales sometimes beach themselves and then die) had resulted in a wave of suicides appears to have originated from a misinterpretation of a May 2016 story from the Russian site Novaya Gazeta. That article reported dozens of suicides of children in Russia during a six-month span, asserting that some of the people who had taken their lives were part of the same online game community on VK.com, a social media network based in St. Petersburg, Russia: Novaya Gazeta reported, "We counted 130 suicides of children that occurred in Russia from November 2015 to April 2016 (!) - Almost all of them were members of the same group on the Internet." Novaya Gazeta reported that "at least" eighty of the suicides were linked to these "blue whale" games, but an investigation by Radio Free Europe found that no suicides had been definitively linked to these online communities. While the Russian-language Internet is filled with profiles of young people playing or seeking to play the game, shocking photographs of self-injury like cutting marked with the game's hashtags, and purported links to teen suicides, not a single death in Russia or Central Asia has been definitively tied to Blue Whale. Over the last six months or so, dozens of suicides and attempted suicides in Russia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan have been provisionally linked to the game, although upon closer inspection, none of them has been found to have a conclusive tie. Furthermore, the Novaya Gazeta report was highly criticized at the time of its publication. For instance, the website Meduza noted that Novaya Gazeta arrived at their conclusion that a social media game was causing teenagers to commit suicide because several teenagers from the same social media group had taken their own lives. However, Meduza argued that it is more reasonable to assume that depressed or suicidal teenagers are simply drawn to the same social media groups, not that the groups were causing them to commit suicide. The author of the material in Novaya Gazeta states that the community in the social network "VKontakte" brings children to suicide. As confirmation of this, it lists the following fact: a few dozen teenagers who committed suicide were in groups devoted to this topic. However, to reliably establish a causal link in this case is impossible, and it is quite possible to assume an inverse relationship: a teen becomes part of a group because it contains people who struggle with suicidal thoughts. The reasons teenagers commit suicide are well researched. According to data from the General Prosecutor's Office, in Russia, 62% of suicides among adolescents are associated with family conflicts and general distress, conflicts with teachers, classmates, friends, and also with the fear of violence by adults and the callousness of others. From a report on the topic from the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), the increase in the number of suicides "occurs in times of economic crisis and sharp social change." For example, in Russia, there was an increase in the number of suicides from 1987 to 1994, when the USSR collapsed. As soon as the country adapted to its new socio-economic conditions, the number of suicides stabilized. Although "Blue Whale" suicide groups have not been directly linked to hundreds of suicides in Russia, the groups do apparently exist. They originated shortly after the death of Rina Palenkova, a Russian teenager who supposedly took her own life shortly after posting a photograph of herself on VK.com. The image was widely circulated on social media, and Rina soon became the central figure of a strange cult-like group. These groups actively exploited the theme of suicide, continuing the cult of Rina Palenkova and publishing shocking content: psychedelic and sinister video recordings of suicides. The creators of the community filled it with strange characters, Hebrew inscriptions, numbers, codes, pictures, and videos with a strange logo (which turned out to have been borrowed from the logo of a brand of lingerie). Later, groups of creators began to promote them through an interactive quest, ARG, a game with augmented reality. They took the idea of a mysterious quest "Insider," created in 2012; few details exist of the original project, but you can get acquainted with its ominous promo video and created on that basis a new ARG with levels and tasks in the real world. The author of the new project "Insiders," Nosferatu by Alexander, refused to communicate with Apparat. According to the testimony of other users, the project initially had no relation to suicide, but later it was "stolen" by the administrators of destructive groups. One of the elements of the project was a timer on the site, counting down the 70 days prior to a certain date according to the F57, until the day of the mass suicides. There is certainly reason to be concerned about groups that venerate and promote suicide, but the creator of the "Sea of Whales" community said that he had no interest in encouraging people to take their own lives. Rather, the group's creator claims that they created the game and the surrounding lore to drive traffic to the page. It took just one day, however, for the news website Lenta.ru to get in touch with More Kitov, the creator of the Sea of Whales community (whales "commit suicide" by beaching themselves); yet astonishingly, he claimed that the administrators of such groups had no interest in grooming minors to take their own lives but were merely interested in boosting their commercial profile. He said that Filip Lis, the administrator of the now-deleted community f57, just wanted to increase the number of subscribers to attract advertisers to his page. In Russia, the social network VKontakte is also a popular advertising market, and you can earn a lot of money from popular communities. Having come across this topic, which was trendy with teenagers, Lis launched the myth of the "sect" and used Rina Palenkova (a young girl who reportedly committed suicide) to promote it. He sold her cloned pages, reposts, videos, and photos of her grave, as well as screenshots of her correspondence. After VKontakte removed f57, he created similar groups. "I looked at all the fuss, got stunned by the hype, and created my whales," More Kitov told Lenta.ru. He insisted that his aim was to dissuade teenagers prone to suicidal thoughts, but first, it was necessary to "become one of them." Russia has a high baseline suicide rate among young people. In 2013, for instance, 461 minors took their own lives. In May 2017, stories appeared in English-language media about the alleged creator of the game, who, according to media reports, remains detained in Russia. Phillip Budeikin, 21, had apparently confessed to inciting young girls to commit suicide months before (calling them "biological waste," according to some reports), but we were only able to trace these claims back to a November 2016 story on one site, saint-petersburg.ru. Did you really push the teenagers to death? - "Firmly. Yes. I really did. Do not worry, you will understand everything. Everyone will understand. They were dying happy. I gave them what they did not have in real life: warmth, understanding, communication." How many of them were there? Is it really that, as a number of media outlets write, there are 130 people in the region? - "Of course not. The investigation of the 'News' is just squalor. There were 17. There were those with whom I simply communicated, whom I knew and who later committed suicide, but without my direct influence." So, come on from the very beginning. When it all started, how it was organized, and how did you get to the point of pushing people to suicide? - "At first? There are people, but there is a biomass. These are those who do not represent any value to society and are or will only bring harm to society. I cleaned our society from such people. It began in 2013. Then I created 'F57' (one of the names of 'death groups' on 'VKontakte'). Just created, see what will happen. It was stuffed with shock content, and it began to attract people. In 2014, it was banned. For a long time, I laughed when I saw everyone trying to understand what 'F57' means. It's simple. F - Philip, my name. 57 - the last digits of my then number. I thought about the idea for five years. You can say I was preparing. I thought through the concept of the project, specific levels, and stages. It was necessary to separate the normal from the biomass." This story was inexplicably picked up months later by international tabloids (alongside claims that the game was spreading across the world), but we remain unable to verify any of the claims. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1401 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did President Trump Tweet 'How Are Your 409Ks Doing'? Claim summaries: What appeared to be a typo was quickly deleted but archived.
contextual information: On Jan. 9, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump posted a tweet, written partially in all-capital letters, asking people how their "409K'S" are doing, and although he deleted the tweet and re-posted it without the "409K" reference, the errant tweet was captured by at least two archiving services.Trump then deleted that tweet and posted a new tweet, substituting in the correct reference, "401K." A 401(k) is a retirement-savings benefit offered to employees by some companies. Funds are generally automatically deducted from paychecks and deposited into an account that is tied to stocks. Therefore the performance of 401(k) accounts are linked to the highs and lows of the stock market. archiving services new tweet Many Americans, however, do not have access to this benefit, as it is dependent on their employer. Regardless of whether they have one, most Americans do not have enough money saved for retirement, according to economic data. do not most U.S. stocks have been experiencing a record bull market for roughly a decade, which Trump generally claims credit for, although it started under his predecessor, Barack Obama. record started Elkins, Kathleen."Only Half of Americans Have Access to a 401(k) Heres How to Save for Retirement If You Dont."
CNBC.18 March 2019. Chang, Sue."Welcome To the Longest Bull Market in Wall Street History."
CNBC.22 August 2018. Chang, Sue. "The Dows Tumultuous History, in One Chart."
MarketWatch. 3 February 2018. Martin, Emmie."Heres How Many Americans Have Nothing Saved for Retirement."
CNBC.28 June 2019. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1402 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Swiss government urged voters on Wednesday to reject a campaign for a nationwide ban on face veils, saying any decision on facial coverings was a matter for Switzerland s cantons individually. But, in a counter move to a referendum to be held by 2020, the government said it would propose to voters a ban on face veils being worn by individuals while doing business with federal authorities, including in immigration offices or employment agencies. Regulation of public spaces in Switzerland is traditionally a cantonal matter, the government said in a statement. So cantons should continue to decide for themselves whether to enact a ban on facial coverings. In particular, it said it was down to individual cantons to decide how they handled tourists from the Arab world who wore the veil. In September, activists submitted a petition for a nationwide ban after collecting more than the 100,000 signatures required to put the proposal to a binding referendum. Several cantons have already taken a stand on the issue. Zurich, Solothurn, Schwyz, Basel City and Glarus have rejected a ban on veils, while Italian-speaking Ticino has imposed a ban. At least two demonstrators who wore veils in Ticino in defiance of the ban were fined 250 Swiss francs ($260), according to media reports. The parliament in St. Gallen canton this year backed a ban on facial coverings which were deemed likely to endanger public security or upset the peace. With an eye to the referendum, the federal government said it would also present a proposal to stop individuals being forced to cover their face. We can not allow husbands and fathers to demand their wives and daughters wear a face veil, Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga told a news conference. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1403 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WASHINGTON — Hackers on Thursday posted hundreds of emails from a young Democratic operative that contained documents detailing the schedules and precise movements of the vice president, the first lady and Hillary Clinton during recent campaign and official political events. The emails included names and cellphone numbers of numerous Secret Service agents, spreadsheets with the names and Social Security numbers of campaign donors, and PowerPoint presentations showing directions for where officials like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. should walk when they arrived at events. The hackers who posted the emails also distributed what they claimed was a scanned image of the information page from Michelle Obama’s passport, though the authenticity of the image could not be verified. The emails were stolen from the personal Gmail account of the Democratic operative, Ian Mellul. They reveal how widely White House officials, Clinton campaign operatives and Secret Service agents have exchanged detailed and sensitive information with people using personal email accounts. There is no indication that Mr. Mellul, 22, who was in effect working as a freelancer when the White House or the Clinton campaign needed help, did anything wrong, and government officials declined to talk about the use of the private account. About a year and a half’s worth of emails from Mr. Mellul’s account were posted late Wednesday by the website DCLeaks. com, which earlier this month released a batch of emails from the personal account of Colin L. Powell, the former secretary of state, in which he voiced his scorn for Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, and his personal peeves with Mrs. Clinton, his Democratic opponent. The newly released emails do not provide specific security details, but they do reveal the types of movements that top political officials make at such events. If emails were hacked before an event, that could present a more serious security issue. One document instructed Mr. Biden to walk up four steps at a loading dock in Cleveland before climbing 26 steps to a holding room. Another used blue arrows to show the route Mrs. Clinton should walk through a donor’s house in Houston. Both documents included pictures of the event locations. Mr. Mellul, who volunteered to work as an advance staff member for the White House and the Clinton campaign as he finished his undergraduate education at George Washington University in Washington, declined to comment. “I’ve got to hang up,†he said Thursday when reached on his cellphone. Cathy L. Milhoan, the director of communications for the Secret Service, said the agency was “aware of the alleged email hacking of a White House staffer. “Obviously the Secret Service is concerned any time unauthorized information that might pertain to one of the individuals we protect, or our operations, is allegedly disclosed,†she added. An F. B. I. spokesman said the bureau was looking into the hacking. Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said that officials took “any reports about a cyberbreach seriously†and that the episode was “something we are taking a close look at. †DCLeaks. com is a relatively new website that has posted documents taken from the accounts of prominent figures like Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, the former commander of NATO forces in Europe, and George Soros, a wealthy backer of liberal causes. On the site, its creators describe themselves as American “hacktivists†who aim to “publish a large amount of emails from officials and their influence agents all over the world. †Mr. Mellul hardly fits either description. His job ranks just above that of an intern. The emails from his account document the often mundane process that White House or campaign staff members go through to prepare for an event, including setting up stages, organizing photo lines, arranging for lecterns and coordinating with the Secret Service about getting clearances for all of the people the politician will encounter along the way. One email contained a spreadsheet with the names and Social Security numbers of almost 100 people scheduled to attend a Houston for Mrs. Clinton. In another exchange, a Secret Service agent discussed how many official “pins†would be provided for hotel staff members to have access to an event. After Mr. Mellul said the hotel had requested 50 Secret Service pins, the agent wrote, “Yikes. †Several of the emails contain what is referred to as a “movement document†or a “site diagram†involving the vice president, the first lady or Mrs. Clinton. Those emails were often sent to a large number of people, including Mr. Mellul. In other cases, Mr. Mellul emailed copies of the documents to other campaign or government officials, including Secret Service officials. “Good morning all,†Mr. Mellul wrote on May 20, the day of a Hillary for America . “Please find the attached site diagram for Houston’s H. F. A. finance event this evening. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns. Ian. †The emails begin in February 2015, when Mr. Mellul was in the honors program and studying political science. In the messages, Mr. Mellul comes across as a conscientious and courteous young man whose friends would email him for help with their school essays and résumés. After high school, he jumped into the intern circuit that feeds into jobs in Washington. In 2014, he received a coveted internship at the White House and later parlayed the connections he had made as an intern into freelance work for the White House. His tryout, it appears, was helping Mrs. Obama’s team at a lunch for congressional spouses on April 15, 2015. In an email two days before the event, Lindsay Drewel, a Washington public relations executive, wrote to Anthony R. Bernal, the deputy chief of staff for Jill Biden, the vice president’s wife, that if Mr. Mellul “can survive that crazy event (which we know he will) he’ll be ready to go! Haha. †After the event, Mr. Mellul even included a Secret Service agent in his round of emails thanking those with whom he had worked. And the day after the lunch, the first lady’s office reached out again to see if he could help with an event in Virginia. Mr. Mellul was excited, and in an email to a friend later that day, he noted that he had been told “it takes a few good before they really trust you. †On April 20, 2015, five days after his first job with Mrs. Obama’s team at the congressional lunch, Mr. Mellul described himself as “on the advance team†for the first lady in an email to his professor saying he might miss class because of an event. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1404 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Only 20 colleges and universities have athletic departments with revenue exceeding expenses.
contextual information: At the end of his 24-year congressional career, Rep. Jim Moran Jr. is returning to his athletic roots. Moran, D-8th, is the son and namesake of Jim Moran Sr., who played professional football with the Boston Redskins in the mid 1930s. The congressman, himself, played football at the College of the Holy Cross in the mid 1960s. Moran, who retires Jan. 3, introduced legislation this fall that would create a commission to look into the policies of the NCAA after myriad college sports scandals. The resolution calls for the panel to make recommendations to improve the interaction of athletics and academics on campuses. That includes examining the graduation rates of student athletes, rules restricting athletes abilities to earn money, and the wherewithal of universities to finance broad athletic programs. We have a system now where in 40 states, the highest-paid public employee is the state universitys head football or basketball coach, and yet only 20 schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision have athletic departments with revenue exceeding expenses, Moran said in a Facebook post. We rated Morans statement about coaches pay as Mostly True. Now, well look at his claim that only 20 athletic departments at the nations largest universities are making a profit. Lets start with a definition of the Football Bowl Subdivision -- the term Moran used to qualify his statement. There are1,083colleges and universities competing in sports that fall under the NCAAs governance. They are grouped into three divisions, that are defined by athletic scholarship rules and the amount of money the schools spend on sports. For example, Division I schools -- which are typically large -- can offer many full athletic scholarships, Division II schools can offer partial athletic scholarships and Division III schools are not allowed to offer sports scholarships. There are 346 Division I schools. Of them, 123 are classified as members of the Football Bowl Subdivision, the top tier of sports competition. These are colleges and universities that are eligible to compete in bowl games and have average attendance of at least 15,000 at their home games. So Moran is generally talking about the athletic department finances at large universities that field football teams. Morans spokesman, Thomas Scanlon, said the congressmans claim was based on anNCAA studyon Division I athletic department budgets that was released in April. The report says, A total of 20 athletics programs in the FBS reported positive net revenues for the 2013 fiscal year. The study deals in broad statistics and does not identify schools that are in the black or the red. Only two sports were profitable at FBS schools, according to the report. Football programs netted a median profit of slightly more than $3 million and mens basketball netted a median $340,000. But the profits at most schools quickly vanished after paying for a long list of other intercollegiate teams, all of which lose money. The median loss among of athletic departments was $11.6 million. Here are some other findings from the NCAA report: According to the report, all athletic departments outside of the FBS operate in the red. In other words, only 20 of the 1,083 college sports programs in the nation are profitable. Our ruling Moran said only 20 FBS schools generate more money from athletics than they spend. We rate his statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1405 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Seattle and Vancouver are like fraternal twins separated at birth. Both are bustling Pacific Northwest coastal cities with populations that have accepted the bargain of dispiriting weather for much of the year in exchange for nearby ski slopes and kayaking and glorious summers. Yet 140 miles of roads and an international border divide the two cities, keeping them farther apart than their geographic and cultural identities would suggest. Now the political, academic and tech elite of both cities are looking for ways to bring them closer together, with the aim of continuing the growth of two of the most vibrant economies in North America. “Vancouver has a lot more in common with Seattle than we do with Calgary, Montreal, Toronto, anywhere else in our country,†Christy Clark, the premier of British Columbia, said in an interview. “We should make the most of those cultural commonalities. †Whether their grand vision of a “Cascadia innovation corridor†— which borrows its name from the region’s Cascade mountain range — ever materializes, leaders on both sides of the border have motives for getting cozier immediately. American tech icons like Microsoft, with voracious needs for global engineering talent, are expanding their Vancouver offices, partly because of Canada’s smoother immigration process. For its part, Vancouver wants to bring more American technology companies to the city in hopes of spinning out future entrepreneurs who will expand its comparatively small base of technology companies. One serious obstacle to Vancouver’s tech ambitions is its housing costs. The median price for a detached home in the metropolitan area in August was 1. 4 million Canadian dollars (about $1. 06 million) a 27. 8 percent increase from a year earlier, according to the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver. In the San Francisco metropolitan area, the median single family home price was about $848, 000, according to Zillow. But while median pay for jobs is $112, 000 a year in the San Francisco Bay Area, it is just under $49, 000 in Vancouver, according to an analysis by PayScale, a compensation data firm. (Some of that discrepancy is due to a drop in the value of Canada’s currency relative to the United States dollar.) “We have San Francisco real estate prices with the incomes of somewhere between Reno and Nashville,†said Andy Yan, acting director of the city program at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver. On the thrumming streets of downtown Vancouver, signs of the Seattle region’s growing economic ties to the city are hard to miss. A rectangular glass and steel office building with a large Microsoft sign occupies nearly an entire city block, sitting atop a large Nordstrom store (another Seattle brand). Microsoft says it invested $120 million in its new offices in Vancouver, which opened in June, and expects to spend $90 million more annually on wages and other operating costs. It plans to employ nearly 750 people in the city. Microsoft is hiring Canadians for the facility, but the country’s more open immigration policies were an important factor in its investment, Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, said in an interview. Microsoft and other tech companies have long complained that the United States education system does not produce enough computer science graduates, forcing them to rely on immigrants from India, China and elsewhere. Foreign workers in the United States can wait about three times as long for a work visa as those in Canada do, the Boston Consulting Group estimates. And the prospect of Donald J. Trump winning the presidency has raised concerns among tech companies, because of the Republican candidate’s comments about further restricting immigration to the United States. “Right now, there’s just a lot of uncertainty about open immigration,†Mr. Smith said. Last month, officials and executives from both cities huddled in a Vancouver hotel to discuss how to enable people, ideas and capital to flow more freely between them, as heedless of the international border separating the cities as a pod of orcas swimming in the sea. At the Cascadia conference, Ms. Clark and Jay Inslee, the governor of Washington, signed an agreement to deepen the ties between Vancouver and Seattle, including more research collaboration between the University of British Columbia and the University of Washington. Bill Gates, of Microsoft, and Satya Nadella, its current chief executive, talked about globalization and education. One proposal to deal with traffic between Vancouver and Seattle was for a rail line that would whisk travelers at more than 200 miles an hour between the cities in 57 minutes (it can take four hours or more by car). The details on financing the project — which could cost an estimated $30 billion or more — have not been worked out. A group of Seattle techies proposed a cheaper alternative: a dedicated lane for autonomous vehicles on Interstate 5, the highway connecting Seattle to the Canadian border. The plan — which relies on autonomous vehicles that still need a lot of work — would not shave much time off the commute between the cities, but could make the ride less tedious by letting travelers work or watch a movie, said Tom Alberg, a managing director at Madrona Venture Group, a Seattle venture capital firm, and an author of the proposal. With roots in timber and shipping, Vancouver’s economy has diversified in recent decades with the growth of film and video game production. The city claims a tech “unicorn†— a valued at over $1 billion — in Hootsuite, which makes social media tools. But Vancouver remains a relative small fry in tech, with about $1. 78 billion in venture capital flowing into local tech in the last decade, compared with about $8. 9 billion in Seattle, the research firm Pitchbook estimates. Still, the city’s tech boom may hit a wall if it cannot address its issues, which are by some standards more acute than those plaguing other thriving cities. Vancouver was ranked the third most unaffordable city in the world, after Hong Kong and Sydney, in a study published this year by Demographia, a consulting firm. Mr. Yan has spent years analyzing his hometown’s soaring real estate values and concluded that a surge in foreign capital, primarily from mainland China, has decoupled Vancouver home prices from the local economy. British Columbia recently imposed a 15 percent tax on new home purchases in the Vancouver area by foreign buyers, a move now facing legal challenges. The housing market is showing signs of cooling off, though it is not yet clear how much of that is because of the tax. The total number of homes sold in the area in August dropped 26 percent from a year earlier and price growth has slowed, according to the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver. Dennis Pilarinos, chief executive of Buddybuild, a Vancouver maker of developer tools for mobile apps, says affordability has been less of a problem for young tech workers, who may be willing to rent smaller apartments and live with roommates. But when get bigger, many struggle to recruit senior executives with families, said Mr. Pilarinos, who previously worked for Microsoft and Amazon in Vancouver. “Companies tend to run into scaling issues,†he said. “You end up with fewer Microsofts or Amazons. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1406 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Tim Kaine, as governor, proposed tax increases on people earning as little as $17,000.
contextual information: Republican Senate candidate George Allen recently accused Democratic opponent Tim Kaine of being a tax hiker, even for people of modest means. During a July 21 debate in Hot Springs, Allen criticized Kaine for proposing tax increases that would affect individuals earning as little as $17,000 a year. We checked to see if Kaine, who served as governor from 2006 to 2010, indeed attempted to raise taxes on people at that income level. The Allen campaign, in a website post, supported Allen's statement by citing news articles about a proposal Kaine unveiled in December 2009 as part of his farewell biennial budget proposal for 2010-2012. Kaine called for adding a 1 percent income tax surcharge and allocating all proceeds to localities in exchange for them eliminating the car tax they impose on personal vehicles. Legislators in 1998 adopted a five-year plan to phase out the personal property tax on most cars and reimburse localities for their lost revenues. However, the program was more expensive than anticipated, and legislators eventually capped the state reimbursement at $950 million a year. The remaining share is paid by vehicle owners. Ending the car tax would mean the state would not have to provide the annual $950 million payment to localities, Kaine said in a speech to the General Assembly's money committees. Kaine wanted to use the savings to help balance the state's recession-wracked budget. News articles from the time indicated that Kaine's policy would raise the maximum state income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. That maximum rate applies to all taxable income above $17,000 after deductions and exemptions are taken into account. The state charges gradually higher income tax rates up to that level. Virginia imposes a 2 percent levy on the first $3,000 of taxable income, 3 percent on the next $2,000, 5 percent on the next $12,000, and then 5.75 percent on all taxable income above $17,000. The bill advancing Kaine's proposal did not specify that the added tax would only be levied on taxable income of $17,000 or more. The added 1 percent surtax would have applied to all income levels, according to Joel Davison, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Finance. Virginia does not require individuals with a state adjusted income below $11,950 and married couples with a state adjusted income below $23,900 to pay state income taxes, so they would not have been affected by the tax increase. Kaine's proposal was ultimately rejected by the General Assembly. It should be noted that some individuals earning $17,000 would have benefited from Kaine's plan if their savings from the elimination of the car tax exceeded their increased income tax. There are no estimates of the number of Virginians who would have fallen into this category, but we suspect it would be a small group. Here’s why: For starters, we can eliminate those who did not own cars. Now, let’s consider those who did own vehicles. A single filer with no children earning $17,000 would have a taxable income of $13,070 after taking the standard deduction and exemption. A 1 percent income tax increase for that person would amount to almost $131 a year. The car levy paid by that person would depend on where he or she lived, as each locality sets its own tax rate based on the assessed value of the vehicle. In Richmond, a person would not pay a $131 levy unless they had a car worth about $9,000. In rural Henry County, a vehicle would have to be valued at about $17,500 to incur a $131 tax. Our ruling: Allen stated that Kaine proposed a tax increase that would have affected people earning as little as $17,000 a year. Not everyone at that level would have paid more under Kaine's plan, but it is a safe bet that a large number of them would have seen their overall tax bill rise. We rate Allen's statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1407 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Tune in to the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR) for another LIVE broadcast of The Boiler Room tonight 6:00 PM PST | 8:00 PM CST | 9:00 PM EST for this special broadcast. Join us for uncensored, uninterruptible talk radio, custom-made for bar fly philosophers, misguided moralists, masochists, street corner evangelists, media-maniacs, savants, political animals and otherwise lovable rascals.Join ACR hosts Hesher and Spore along with Jay Dyer of Jays Analysis, Patrick Henningsen of 21WIRE, Infidel Pharaoh (ACR contributor) and Andy Nowicki, author of Conspiracy, Compliance, Control & Defiance, for the hundred and fourth episode of BOILER ROOM. Turn it up, tune in and hang with the ACR Brain-Trust for this weeks boil downs and analysis and the usual gnashing of the teeth of the political animals in the social reject club. We re breaking down the developments in Syria and the Trump approval of military strikes in Syria.Listen to Boiler Room EP #104 War Sells But Who s Buying on Spreaker.Direct Download Episode #104Please like and share the program and visit our donate page to get involved!Reference Links: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1408 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Why a recount only in states that Trump won?Why a recount in Michigan, which is all paper ballot?@DrJillStein?https://t.co/hXRRg75qPW pic.twitter.com/xEpxFraDoi Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 25, 2016 This election, we are not only deciding what kind of world we will have, but whether we will have a world or not going forward, Stein warned, explaining that Clinton s trigger-happy militarism is a mushroom cloud waiting to happen. Stein blasted Clinton s warmongering that almost singlehandedly brought us the turmoil in Libya and could lead us into a nuclear war if Clinton were elected president. Hillary brought us Libya almost singlehandedly, Stein explained in a Thursday Fox Business interview. She continued:And she has said that she will lead the charge with a no-fly zone in Syria, and that basically amounts to a declaration of war against Russia, who is there under international law, having been invited by the sitting government. Like it or not, Russia has the sanction of international law to be there. For us to go in and declare a no-fly zone means get ready for war with Russia. Both of us have 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair trigger alert. This is the most dangerous moment according to the former president of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, who, two weeks ago, said this is the most dangerous nuclear moment ever.Stein elaborated on this view during a Facebook Live interview with progressive Marc Lamont Hill, who has endorsed Stein over Clinton: In this election, we are not only deciding what kind of world we will have, but whether we will have a world or not going forward, Stein said, adding:Not only in regards to climate, not only in regards to these expanding wars where Hillary has this proven track record of the most pro-conflict military policy as possible, and she s calling for a no-fly zone in Syria, which means we re essentially declaring war on Russia if Hillary gets elected declaring war on Russia at a time when we have 2,000 nuclear weapons between us and the Russians on hair trigger alert. This is a mushroom cloud waiting to happen. So it s really important right now for us to stand up and start building a force to do the right thing.Paul Joseph Watson asks another great question for Americans. Why not count the states Hillary won by a small margin?:Why is there no recount in states that Hillary won with smaller margins than Trump won PA? #AuditTheVote pic.twitter.com/qYLw7pK3dv Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 25, 2016 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1409 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 0 comments Do you think that this Veteran’s actions were wrong? I think that #BAMASITS student protesters are a bunch of BLM Hippie whiners! Way to go, Colin Kaepernick! Your actions as a millionaire whiner in the National Football League have now influenced the young minds of young students at college football games. These kids are not even equipped with enough mental toughness to consider basic issues. You believe that your actions will help them to create a better life? Evidently, protesting the National Anthem is a fad that is not quite ready to die. One recent iteration can be found at the University of Alabama, where students use the hashtag #BAMASITS in an attempt to draw attention to their cause. These little babies have the right to protest, but like many who have a liberal mindset, they are only tolerant of others who share their views. If you stand up for your own views, as this Veteran did, you are behaving in ways that are “outside of your rights.” One representative of #BAMASITS, Emerald Vaughn, described the group like this: “#BAMASITS is a peaceful protest. We are protesting social injustice. We support underrepresented LGBTQ community and people of color against discrimination and we’re also protesting against police brutality.” Fine, Emerald. Have your protests. One question, though: What is wrong with a Veteran of the United States military standing during a game and sharing his own views? Teddi Badami, an Air Force Veteran, decided that he would do just that. Video has surfaced of the #BAMASITS crowd protesting the National Anthem at Bryant-Denny Stadium, prior to the Texas A&M game, when Badami stood in front of their protest with his hand over his heart. Badami simply stood and sang along with the words of the National Anthem. “I politely stood up to ask him, could you move and he said he was a veteran. I respect veterans, I don’t have anything against veterans but I felt like you shouldn’t try to invade and bully your way. That was total disrespect and disregard of our protest,” said Vaughn. Clearly, Badami does not feel that way. Take a look at video footage of the event, below: #bamasits says a veteran interrupted their peaceful protest, the vet says otherwise. Watch @abc3340 at 10 for more. pic.twitter.com/VO6LLr9Hig
— Andrew Donley (@Andrewabc3340) October 26, 2016
Do you believe that Badami was out of line?
“I stood there with my hand over my heart and sang the national anthem loud and proud. I made no comments to any of the individuals other than I stand for the national anthem and that I served our country,” Badami said.
“I felt that it was disrespectful, he can have his own, whatever his points that he wanted to make, he could have did that on his own. People fight over, they fight our wars with veterans for us to have the right to sit or stand for the national anthem,” Vaughn said.
Badami says he and his friend returned to their seats after the anthem but were temporarily detained by campus police.
Detained by campus police? Give me a break! | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1410 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did Donald Trump's Grandfather Make His Fortune in Prostitution? Claim summaries: A meme claimed Frederick Trump was a pimp and drug dealer who made his fortune running a brothel and opium den.
contextual information: In November 2015, the biography of Frederick Trump, Donald Trump's grandfather, was condensed into two paragraphs and then circulated on the internet via a meme. While some of the information included in the meme is accurate, much of it is either exaggerated or incomplete. This particular rumor centers on the idea that Frederick Trump made his fortune through brothels and opium dens. While there is anecdotal evidence that Trump dabbled in prostitution, there is no proof that this constituted the bulk of his fortune. In Gwenda Blair's 2000 book, The Trumps: Three Generations of Builders and a Presidential Candidate, she describes how Frederick Trump opened a series of restaurants and hotels during the Klondike Gold Rush in the 1890s. One of those hotels, The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel, was described as decadent and far superior to other restaurants in the area. In the larder were salmon and an extraordinary variety of meats, including duck, ptarmigan, grouse, goose, and swan, as well as caribou, moose, goat, sheep, rabbit, and squirrel. Incredibly, the New Arctic served fresh fruit: red currants, raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, blackberries, and even cranberries. A small oasis of luxury, the Arctic's menu was a vast improvement over what the two restaurateurs had been able to offer on the trail. An anonymous letter to the Yukon, however, claimed that The Arctic Restaurant and Hotel was also known for prostitution: "I would advise respectable women traveling alone, or with an escort, to be careful in their selection of hotels at Bennett," he wrote. "For single men, the Arctic has excellent accommodations as well as the best restaurant in Bennett, but I would not advise respectable women to go there to sleep as they are liable to hear that which would be repugnant to their feelings and uttered, too, by the depraved of their own sex." While it's unclear if Frederick Trump directly profited from prostitution at his hotel (or whether it even occurred there), it should be noted that the world's oldest profession was relatively commonplace during the Gold Rush. The meme also claims that Frederick Trump decided to return to Germany when police started cracking down on "his criminal rackets." Again, this is based on little more than a morsel of truth and does not tell the whole story. In 1901, Trump sold his assets and returned to Germany. While one could argue that Trump made the decision because he believed that police were going to start enforcing prostitution laws, that is only one factor that led to Trump's departure for Germany; Frederick Trump saw that it was time to leave. If Major Wood actually enforced the laws regarding prostitution, gambling, and liquor, hotels and restaurants would be far less profitable. Not only that, the economic boom was bound to be short-lived. There was not nearly enough solid economic development to absorb these newcomers in any long-term way; when the placer deposits were emptied, they would go back home. Without the umbrella of gold, other local industries would not be strong enough to sustain themselves and compete with cheaper sources farther south. The boom was over, Frederick Trump realized. He left just in time, avoiding the uproar when his erstwhile partner hit the skids and the economic decline that would soon sweep over White Horse. In a situation that created many losers, he managed to emerge a winner. He had made money; perhaps even more unusually in the Yukon, he had also kept it and departed from White Horse with a substantial nest egg. He had accomplished his goal of making and saving enough money to marry, but he had no intention of doing so in America. For this important moment, he would have to return to Germany. While the meme exaggerated Trump's involvement in "criminal rackets," it did correctly state that Trump returned to the United States after the German government determined that he had originally left Germany in 1885 to avoid taxes and the army. In summation, Donald Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump was a German immigrant who made his fortune by opening several restaurants and hotels in Seattle and British Columbia during the Yukon Gold Rush. While some of these hotels may have been used for prostitution, gambling, or other seedy activities common on the trail, it is incorrect to say that Trump built his fortune on illegal activities. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1411 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Despite massive boycott threats by consumers, at least 3 major sponsors of the NFL have come out in support of players disrespecting our flag and our veterans. NFL players have joined the now unemployed 49 ers QB Colin Kaepernick to take a knee on the field during our national anthem as a way to show support for the Black Lives Matter anti-cop movement. The protest exploded over the weekend when President Trump spoke out against the disrespect NFL players are showing for our flag, turning the protest into an anti-Trump protest for players who many believe are still angry that Trump won the election, defeating the seriously flawed Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton.Ford Motor Co., Armour Inc., and Anheuser-Busch InBev SA issued statements that affirmed NFL players rights to kneel during the pre-game national anthem, while also sounding patriotic notes and affirming their support for the flag.Ford Motor Co, one of the biggest sponsors of the NFL just revealed that they are supporting the national anthem protests. We respect individuals rights to express their views, even if they are not ones we share, Ford stated. That s part of what makes America great. Ford Motor Co chairman Martha Firestone Ford took her support for the players anti-cop, Black Lives Matter and anti-President Trump protests one step further when she joined her players on the field and linked arms with her daughters. The tangled responses are the latest version of the challenges faced by corporations in a world in which the president makes public demands and denouncements of companies via Twitter. General Motors Co., Campbell Soup Co., ESPN parent Walt Disney Co. and Uber Technologies Inc. have all faced calls for boycotts related to their perceived support of or distance from the White House. BloombergAmericans are not as easily fooled by the actions of these disrespectful athletes and the team owners, as they work together with the media in an attempt to weaken and discredit our President for having the audacity to stand up for America, our flag and for the honor of every brave man and woman who have sacrificed their lives for our great nation.One of the great things about America is that consumers can decide not to purchase merchandise or goods from companies who continue to advertise with the NFL. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1412 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Enter to win a $100 Chipotle gift card giveaway. Claim summaries: Chipotle is not offering free $100 gift cards for National Avocado Day to internet users who share a link with their friends.
contextual information: In July 2018, the Chipotle Mexican Grill chain of fast casual restaurants ran a promotion in conjunction with National Avocado Day, offering free guacamole to customers with their orders on 31 July: free guacamole Unfortunately, scammers took advantage of this promotion to post counterfeit offers for free $100 Chipotle gift cards, touting that users need only share a link with five friends to claim their bounty: counterfeit offers This fake offer was just another variation of a long-running form of scam with a familiar pattern. First, scammers set up look-alike websites and social media pages that mimic those of legitimate companies in order to promote scams advertising free gift cards or coupons. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a "survey" that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who wish to claim their "free" gift cards eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions (negating the free aspect of the gift card). The Better Business Bureau offers three tips to identify similar scams: Dont believe what you see. Its easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure theres a link to their privacy policy. Watch out for a reward thats too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1413 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Says the main Central Texas food bank is delivering 50 percent more food to the poor than three years ago.
contextual information: In a September 2011 floorspeech, Democratic U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin spoke of two concerns he said are growing in the Lone Star State: poverty and hunger.Doggett said that in tough times, more families are turning to food banks, creating immense demand. Among his examples: The Austin-basedCapital Area Food Bank of Texasthis year is delivering 50 percent more food to poor people than it did three years ago.In his speech, Doggett attributed that figure to John Turner, a food bank official. We wondered if the proclaimed increase was correct, and if so, whether that accurately reflected a surge in hunger in our area.The food bank, founded in 1981, takes in donations of food and money from the government, the food industry and the public, then distributes food to Central Texas residents directly and through more than 350 agencies in its 21-county service area roughly centered on Travis and Williamson counties. (Click to view a map. )The regions north edge runs from Mills County in the west to Freestone County in the east; its south edge runs from Gillespie and Blanco counties in the west to Fayette County on the east.Doggett spokeswoman Sarah Dohl told us by email that Doggett drew his 50 percent figure from aSept. 4, 2011, news story in theGuardian, a British newspaper, which quotes Turner saying the food bank was delivering 50 percent more food to the poor than it had done three years ago.In an interview, Turner, the food banks senior director for marketing and branding, recently told us hed given theGuardiana conservative estimate: The pounds of food distributed by the bank had actually increased 64 percent, going from 15.4 million pounds in 2007 to 25.3 million pounds in 2010. Turner noted, too, that the 2010 poundage was inflated by one-time federal stimulus aid enabling the bank to buy an additional 2.3 million pounds for the Summer Food Nutrition Program. Subtract that, and the 2010 figure becomes 23 million pounds -- up 49 percent from what the bank gave out in 2007.So, do the poundage figures mean hunger in the area shot up 49 percent or more over the past few years?J.C. Dwyer of the Texas Food Bank Network, the state association of food banks, told us pounds of food distributed generally isn't the best measure of need in a food bank's region: Its more of a metric for how were dealing with the needs, Dwyer said. A better way of gauging needs, he said, is to track the number of residents requesting food assistance.That is, the amount of food distributed doesn't necessarily reflect ups and downs in need. In the holiday season, donations and distributions surge, for instance, but that doesnt necessarily mean surges in need.Dwyer and Turner each suggested we check on changes in food demands through Hunger in America, a report commissioned every four years by Feeding America, a national charity that acts as a clearinghouse connecting food supplies to 200 food banks, including the one in Austin.There was no Hunger in America report for 2007, the first year in Doggetts statement, but thereports based on surveys in 2005 and 2009were broken down into smaller reports covering the Austin banks 21-county region: In 2005, the Capital Area bank fed an estimated 174,900 people. In 2009, the estimated number of people served was284,900 for the year, up 63 percent from those who were served in 2005. That change outstripped population growth, according toU.S. census estimates. In 2005, the 21 counties had 2,265,981 residents. By 2009, the regions population was 2,547,559 -- up 12.4 percent. Put another way, the food bank provided sustenance to nearly 8 percent of the regions residents in 2005 while about 11 percent of a greater total of residents got food in 2009.Finally, we wondered if Doggett was correct in saying the food aid went to the poor alone.Turner told us the bank does not question people who come seeking food as to their income -- if you show up, you are fed, he said, though depending on the lines that form, it could take an hour or two. However, the Hunger in America report using 2009 data states that 73 percent of the Capital Area food banks clients had incomes below the federal poverty level.Census figures for 2010, drawing on 2009 data, show that poverty in the 21-county region matched the percentage for Texas overall: Seventeen percent of residents had income below the federal poverty level.According to the United States Department of Agriculture,Dwyer told us, food insecurity across Texas -- the percentage of households at risk of missing meals because of financial pressure -- rose from 14.8 percent in the three-year period 2005-07 to 18.8 percent in 2008-10.Our conclusion: Changes in the amount of food distributed over several years, which Doggett cited, might not be the best way to gauge changes in residents needs. That said, the number of Central Texas requestors for food aid over those years outpaced regional population growth. The 63 percent increase in requestors also exceeded the 50-percent increase in food distributed that he stressed, though, contrary to his statement, not all those pounds of food went to the poor.We rate the claim Mostly True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1414 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: ( ANTIMEDIA ) If you had happened to Google the term ‘pathological lying’ on Sunday evening, you would have been met with none other than the bright, smiling face of presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton. Before Wikipedia administrators put a temporary lock on the entry early Monday morning, the top Google result for the term was a link to the Wiki article displaying Clinton’s photo, along with the following quote defining pathological lying:
“It is a stand-alone disorder as well as a symptom of other disorders such as psychopathy and antisocial, narcissistic, and histrionic personality disorders, but people who are pathological liars may not possess characteristics of the other disorders. Excessive lying is a common symptom of several mental disorders.”
The revision history of the entry shows the picture of Clinton was originally added to the ‘pathological lying’ Wikipedia article on the morning of October 29th, but it wasn’t until the next night that the ever-vigilant internet community took notice and excitedly spread the word on Facebook and Twitter . Check out the Google Trends report for ‘pathological lying’ below:
Unsurprisingly, most reactions were supportive of the alteration to the Wikipedia article, once again showing the public’s general distrust of the presidential candidate. A poll conducted by Quinnipiac University last year asked voters to say the first thing that came to mind when they thought of Hillary Clinton. The most popular response was “liar,” followed by “dishonest” and “untrustworthy.” Maybe if the biggest names in journalism weren’t outright colluding with Hillary’s campaign , that poll would have been more widely reported. Maybe.
Due to the fact major media corporations are completely ignoring the corruption surrounding the Clinton campaign, it has been left to Wikileaks, independent media outlets, and the social media community to push this information into the public eye. Just a week away from the election, new evidence was discovered that prompted the FBI to announce they have reopened the criminal investigation into Hillary’s private email server.
With Republican nominee Donald Trump scheduled to appear in court to face rape allegations, there is a high possibility the next president of the United States will be facing criminal charges before they’re even inaugurated. If nothing else, this election cycle is proving that people want truth — and they’ll get creative to expose it.
Courtesy post via Josie Wales and theAntiMedia.org. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1415 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Once again, a mouthpiece for Donald Trump gets their ass handed to them for blatantly lying on the air.During her show on Saturday morning, MSNBC host Joy Reid had to frustratingly correct Trump supporter David Malpass for making false claims about Hillary Clinton.It began with Reid talking about the alleged pay-to-play scandal Republicans have been accusing the former Secretary of State of conducting in conjunction with the Clinton Foundation during her years in the post.Reid explained that if Donald Trump gave $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation which then went to fighting AIDS in Africa, which benefits those who get treatment. Reid pointed out that getting a phone call from Clinton aide Huma Abedin is not proof of pay-to-play.However, Donald Trump giving $25,000 to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi s campaign in exchange for getting the investigation against Trump University dropped in that state is the very definition of pay-to-play.Malpass tried to claim that there were $10 million contributions but when challenged to provide proof of that claim Malpass could not do so. Reid called out Malpass for lying and went on to explain that the Associated Press found that only 85 of the meetings that Clinton had with people who were donors but not one of those meetings occurred after a donation was made.The AP story was pilloried, Reid said, because they attempted to find pay-to-play and found nothing. Huma Abedin emailing you back is not getting something, Reid continued. It s Huma Abedin emailing you back. Malpass, however, desperately tried to pin something on Hillary Clinton and brought up her emails, which have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Reid called Malpass out again, but he continued to claim that the emails brought out the information about the Clinton Foundation. Malpass also claimed that Hillary Clinton has not held any press conferences but Reid corrected him again by pointing out that she held two last week.As Reid repeatedly shamed Malpass for conflating press conferences, emails and foundations, her other guest Kurt Eichenwald broke out in laughter because Malpass was clearly making false claims.By the end of the segment, a frustrated Reid admitted that her head hurts after having to debunk so much bullshit from Trump s minions.Here s the video via YouTube.Trump and his team are desperate to make anything Clinton does into a scandal. And that s why any claims they make that they are somehow winning this election are complete bullshit. A winning campaign does not have to stoop to telling outright lies to the media every day. But that is what Trump is doing because his poll numbers have imploded and his campaign has fallen off a cliff.Republicans have waged countless witch hunts using taxpayer money in an effort to sabotage the woman who stands in their way of absolute power and they have failed miserably because the investigations have always cleared Hillary Clinton of wrongdoing. Rather than admit that, Trump and his minions would rather repeat lies because it s all they have left.Featured image via screenshot | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1416 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: United Airlines said it had resumed flights from Newark, New Jersey to New Delhi, India on Sunday, after suspending the service temporarily over concerns about poor air quality in the Indian capital. UA Flight 82 had been canceled on Friday and Saturday, data from flight tracking website FlightRadar24 showed, while the airline s website said it had waiver policies in place for passengers traveling to, from or through Delhi until Monday. UA Flight 82 has resumed operations, but we will continue to monitor conditions over the next few days , a spokesman said. The third-largest U.S carrier is monitoring advisories as the New Delhi region remains under a public health emergency, and is coordinating with respective government agencies, the United Airlines spokesman had earlier told Reuters. Last week, New Delhi declared a pollution emergency as toxic smog hung over the city for days, with tourism operators reporting cancellation of bookings for the Christmas holidays. U.S. rivals Delta Air Lines Inc and American Airlines Group Inc said they do not operate flights to New Delhi, while several Asian airlines contacted by Reuters said they had not canceled flights. Verisk Maplecroft, a risk consultancy, says India has the worst air quality out of a list of 198 countries it measures, and that New Delhi ranks among the world s top 10 most polluted cities with many urban areas around the capital also among those with the worst air quality. At the national level, India tops the index rankings (i.e. the country with the worst air quality), followed by Bangladesh and Thailand, said Richard Hewston, Verisk Maplecroft s global head of environment and climate change. The company s Air Quality Index assesses the atmospheric concentrations of fine particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers, known as PM 2.5. A U.S. embassy measure of PM 2.5 showed a reading of 481 in New Delhi on Monday morning, local time. The outer limit of good air is 50. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1417 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a directive to his agency on Monday seeking to end the practice of settling lawsuits with environmental groups behind closed doors, saying the groups have had too much influence on regulation. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who sued the agency he now runs more than a dozen times in his former job as attorney general of oil producing Oklahoma, has long railed against the so-called practice of “sue and settle.†The EPA under former President Barack Obama quietly settled lawsuits from environmental groups with little input from regulated entities, such as power plants, and state governments, he argues. The directive seeks to make EPA more transparent about lawsuits by reaching out to states and industry that could be affected by settlements, forbidding the practice of entering into settlements that exceed the authority of courts, and excluding attorney’s fees and litigation costs when settling with groups. Most lawsuits by green groups on the agency seek to push the agency to speed up regulation on issues such as climate and air and water pollution, studies have shown. “The days of regulation through litigation are over,†Pruitt said. “We will no longer go behind closed doors and use consent decrees and settlement agreements to resolve lawsuits filed against the agency.†Pruitt’s order was supported by conservative groups. Daren Bakst, a research fellow in agricultural policy at the Heritage Foundation think tank, said sue and settle has led to “egregious antics†that have “effectively handed over the setting of agency priorities to environmental pressure groups,†and has led to rushed rulemaking by the agency. But Pat Parenteau, an environmental law professor at the Vermont Law School, said Pruitt’s directive would be “counterproductive†and costly because in the end courts could fine the agency if it does not meet compliance dates for issuing regulations. “He can fight it if he wants as long as he wants, and spend as much money as he wants,†Parenteau said. “But in the end if you’ve missed a statutory deadline, you are going to be ordered (by a court) to comply and then you are going to be ordered to pay fees.†| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1418 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review, and a former CNN producer and correspondent. Follow her @FridaGhitis . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
(CNN) Hillary Clinton roared to a clear victory in the Iowa town hall Monday night , coming across as energetic, articulate, knowledgeable and experienced. I never thought I'd find myself commenting on the clothing choices of female political candidates (men have almost no choices to make) but in this case, Clinton's red top underscored her fiery presentation. For once, the men may have wished they had worn red jackets!
There was, however, a downside for Clinton in her triumph -- the once seemingly inevitable Democratic nominee opted to tie herself ever more closely to President Barack Obama's foreign policy. Indeed, come the general election, Clinton's full-throated defense of the controversial Iran deal and other foreign policy choices will make it that much harder to distance herself from the broader historic catastrophe of the unraveling of the Middle East that has unfolded during Obama's watch.
Still, with a surging challenge from the left in the form of Sen. Bernie Sanders, Clinton may have felt she had no choice but to embrace Obama's legacy more closely in an effort to earn the vote of party activists and other committed Democrats. The polls show Democrats, by massive majorities , have backed Obama's performance throughout his presidency. To secure the nomination, then, Clinton may need to become Obama's candidate, even if in the fall campaign she faces a general public among which less than half the voters are satisfied with the current administration.
Fortunately for Clinton, the task of drumming up Democratic support by aligning herself with the President was made easier just hours before the town hall began when Obama gave an interview that sounded close to an endorsement, "[The] one thing everybody understands is that this job right here, you don't have the luxury of just focusing on one thing," the President said, in what sounded like a dig at Sanders, who has made the fight against income inequality the focus of his campaign.
Sanders, of course, showed why he has excited so many voters. The event format was not designed to produce blockbuster ratings by creating clashes between the candidates. Instead, it looked like a series of job interviews for the presidency; a fitting format for Iowa's voters, who take their democratic responsibilities very seriously.
In Sanders they, and viewers at home, saw a man who displays a singular level of unrehearsed honesty and a clear commitment to fighting against a wrong that troubles him (as it undoubtedly does many Americans). As Sanders reminded everyone, in the aftermath of the multibillion dollar bank bailouts that followed the subprime lending and the widespread pain of the Great Recession, it is nothing short of infuriating that the people who created the mess received millions of dollars in bonuses. This even as life became harder for many Americans and as inequalities continued to grow.
Sanders declared "we need a political revolution." And, when asked to explain what it means to be a democratic socialist -- a label not normally embraced by voters in the world's most successful capitalist economy -- Sanders did a convincing job of explaining that democratic socialism means "economic rights, the right to economic security, should exist in the United States of America," adding that "it is immoral and wrong that the top one-tenth of 1% in this country own almost 90% -- almost-- own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%."
When questioned about his lack of foreign policy experienced compared with Clinton, Sanders pointed to his vote against the war in Iraq. On the question of how the next president could get anything done in the current climate of partisanship, Sanders said his track record in government proves he can get legislation approved. But it was difficult not to notice that Clinton offered a more extensive explanation about why her foreign policy expertise mattered, explaining how results comes down to relationships, and adding that she knows how to find common ground and build ties.
The time in the spotlight for the third Democrat in the race, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, amounted to little more than a break between the two halves of the main event. O'Malley may be hoping that the complicated rules of the Iowa caucuses will produce a miracle for his campaign, but it was difficult to see what he offers that is more compelling than the two alternatives. He certainly tried to look the part, even taking off his jacket and rolling up his sleeves in a moment that seemed right out of an old "West Wing" episode -- clearly rehearsed and by now something of cliché.
Unfortunately for the governor, the more "mature" candidates offered plenty of dynamism of their own, even if it came packaged under more wrinkles. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1419 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WASHINGTON — He is forfeiting at least $41 million in pay. He vows that his bank will drop its sales incentive program — blamed for prompting bankers to set up illegal and unauthorized bank and credit card accounts to meet their sales goals — by the end of the week, not in January, as he had previously promised. But at a hearing Thursday before the House Financial Services Committee, nobody was impressed. If anything, the House lawmakers who interrogated John G. Stumpf, the chief executive of Wells Fargo, were even angrier and more hostile than their Senate counterparts who questioned him last week, before either of those steps had been taken. One by one, Democrats and Republicans alike took turns ripping apart Mr. Stumpf and what took place at the bank he leads. They denounced the actions as “theft,†“a criminal enterprise,†identity fraud, an outrage and a devastating blow to the entire banking industry. But that was not all of Wells Fargo’s bad news for the day. Also on Thursday, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency fined Wells Fargo $20 million for violating rules on lending to members of the military, including a rate cap on how much interest can be charged to service members on active duty. In a separate action, Wells Fargo agreed to pay $4 million to resolve a Justice Department investigation into improper seizures of vehicles owned by soldiers who fell behind on their loans. “In those instances where some service members did not receive the appropriate benefits and protections, we did not live up to our commitment and we apologize,†the company said in a statement. “We have been notifying and fully compensating customers and will complete this work in 60 days. †The news did not play well with members of the House committee, who spent more than four hours on Thursday questioning and castigating Mr. Stumpf about the misdeeds under his leadership. “It appears that the company just can’t make it through even this congressional hearing without us learning more and more information about what is going on at Wells Fargo,†Representative Maxine Waters, a Democrat of California, said as word began to spread of the coming sanctions over military lending. But Mr. Stumpf — whom the members of the House committee personally blamed for the persistent and widespread misdeeds — stuck to the same script he has used throughout the crisis. The problem, he explained, was an ethical lapse among the 5, 300 employees, most of them bankers and tellers, who had been fired for their actions since 2011. At the hearing on Thursday, Mr. Stumpf apologized repeatedly for his bank’s failings and repeated his earlier pledge — given last week to the disgruntled Senate Finance Committee — to accept “full responsibility†for them. But he again rejected lawmakers’ attempts to cast the scandal as a consequence of broader failings in Wells Fargo’s leadership and corporate culture. “I led the company with courage,†Mr. Stumpf said, while admitting that the company “should have done more sooner†to address the problem of unauthorized accounts being created by employees in the names of real customers. After the Senate hearing and before the House hearing, the board of directors of Wells Fargo agreed to claw back $41 million of Mr. Stumpf’s unvested stock awards, deny him his annual bonus and strip away a portion of his $2. 8 million base salary. Mr. Stumpf said he approved of the decision. Carrie L. Tolstedt, who until recently ran the Wells Fargo retail banking operation, will lose $19 million in compensation. Confronted by the lawmakers with evidence that the practice of setting up phony accounts to meet sales goals might have gone back much further than the bank has admitted, perhaps to 2007, Mr. Stumpf said that Wells Fargo was continuing to investigate the extent of the problem, how far back it stretched and who knew. But those steps did not appease the lawmakers. Several called for Mr. Stumpf’s resignation, and others asked why he shouldn’t be jailed, like a bank robber. “Something is going wrong at this bank, and you are the head of it,†said Gregory Meeks, Democrat of New York, adding, “You should be fired. †Mr. Stumpf replied, “I serve at the pleasure of the board. †Mr. Stumpf is the board chairman. Mr. Meeks, at times pounding the table for emphasis, asked if Mr. Stumpf would have set free someone who had robbed a Wells Fargo Bank, then simply apologized and taken responsibility. Criticizing Wells Fargo’s “criminal activity,†Mr. Meeks said: “Your bank, Wells Fargo, has given the entire financial services industry a black eye. †“To the American people, this kind of feels like déjà vu all over again,†said Representative Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who is chairman of the committee. “Some institution is found engaging in terrible activities. There is a headline, fine, and yet no one seems to be held accountable. †As Mr. Stumpf testified, a video screen on the hearing room’s wall displayed a scroll of more than a dozen fines Wells Fargo has paid in recent years, totaling more than $10 billion. The list included penalties for subprime loan abuses, discriminating against and Hispanic mortgage borrowers, and foreclosure violations, among others. Mr. Hensarling asked whether such fines are simply the “cost of doing business. †Mr. Stumpf answered no, adding, “I don’t want our culture to be defined by these mistakes. †Wells Fargo has been in crisis mode since it acknowledged this month that its employees had, over the course of several years, opened as many as 1. 5 million bank accounts and 565, 000 credit card accounts that may not have been approved by customers. The company agreed to pay $185 million in penalties and fines to settle cases brought by federal regulators and the Los Angeles city attorney. Wells Fargo has said it is contacting all of the customers who may have been affected. So far, the bank has contacted 20, 000 customers with questionable credit cards. About a quarter of them have said that they did not apply for the card or could not remember if they had, Mr. Stumpf said at the hearing. He also said that Wells Fargo would eliminate its product sales goals for retail bankers by the end of the week, accelerating the bank’s previously announced plan to drop them by the start of next year. say those sales goals led to intense pressure on workers to cheat to fulfill unrealistically high quotas. Mr. Stumpf carried with him a binder filled with material to help him form his answers, and he consulted it repeatedly as lawmakers questioned him about how many customers with potentially unauthorized accounts had been affected in their own home states. He reeled off the answers: Texas, 149, 857 Missouri, 1, 191 Delaware, 4, 255. The plight of Wells Fargo workers who lost their jobs for not meeting sales goals came up several times during the hearing, with lawmakers citing personal experiences from their constituents. Representative Nydia M. Velázquez, Democrat of New York, asked how many workers Wells Fargo had fired for falling short. “My understanding is that people should not be fired, terminated for missing sales goals,†Mr. Stumpf answered. “I’m not saying it didn’t happen. We’re doing a review of whatever, whoever might have been terminated for that. †As for those who did take the fall for the illegal account openings, Representative Brad Sherman, a Democrat of California, was particularly acerbic. “You fired 5, 300 people,†he said at the hearing. “You took 5, 300 good Americans and turned them into felons. †It is time, he concluded, to break up the big banks. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1420 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: FDIC: Notification of Bank Insolvency Claim summaries: Is the FDIC sending out e-mail notices about accounts in failed banks?
contextual information: Virus: FDIC notice of bank failure. REAL VIRUS Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2009] FDIC has officially named your bank a failed bank You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insuredbank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your accountwith as a failed bank, thus, taking control of its assets. You need to visit the official FDIC website and perform the followingsteps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage: Visit FDIC website: https://www.fdic.gov/ https://www.fdic.gov/ Download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage Origins: In October 2009, Internet users began receiving e-mails purporting to have come from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the agency that insures deposits in U.S. bank accounts. These messages claimed that the recipients were holders of FDIC-insured bank accounts in failed banks and instructed them to click on a link to the FDIC web site in order download a file which would allow them to check their "Deposit Insurance Coverage." However, the link embedded in the e-mail led not to the real FDIC web site, but to a spoof web site. Attempting to download the proffered file from that site could initiate the installation of malware on the user's computer (presumably to collect sensitive personal information): The real FDIC put up an alert to warn consumers about this fraudulent mailing: alert The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has received numerous reports of a fraudulent e-mail that has the appearance of being sent from the FDIC. The subject line of the e-mail states: "check your Bank Deposit Insurance Coverage." The e-mail tells recipients that, "You have received this message because you are a holder of a FDIC-insured bank account. Recently FDIC has officially named the bank you have opened your account with as a failed bank, thus, taking control of its assets." The e-mail then asks recipients to "visit the official FDIC website and perform the following steps to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage" (a fraudulent link is provided). It then instructs recipients to "download and open your personal FDIC Insurance File to check your Deposit Insurance Coverage." This e-mail and associated Web site are fraudulent. Recipients should consider the intent of this e-mail as an attempt to collect personal or confidential information, some of which may be used to gain unauthorized access to on-line banking services or to conduct identity theft. The FDIC does not issue unsolicited e-mails to consumers. Financial institutions and consumers should NOT follow the link in the fraudulent e-mail. Last updated: 28 October 2009 | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1421 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Paul Ryan said that the House would implement a completely transparent process for repealing and replacing Obamacare. Either Ryan has no idea what his fellow Republicans are up to, or he himself lied about this. He specifically told the Today Show: We re not hatching some bill in a backroom and plopping it on the American people s front door. Really. There s a problem, considering that Rep. Chris Collins, of New York, said to the Washington Examiner: [The plan will] be made available Thursday morning to Republicans in a basement room of an office building that adjoins the Capitol. That s what they consider transparent? Please! What are they afraid of?According to New York Magazine, the GOP s replacement will absolutely rip health insurance away from millions of Americans the same millions who were able to afford insurance under the ACA. That s especially true for low-income Americans, who benefited greatly from the ACA s expansion of Medicaid, and also the tax subsidies that went towards the cost of premiums for people who made too much for Medicaid, but too little to afford insurance any other way.In Trump s empty speech to a joint session of Congress, he reiterated the old GOP talking points of expanded health savings accounts and tax credits. The thing with those tax credits, though, is that they re based entirely on age. A 50-year old wealthy person would get the same tax credit as a 50-year old poor person. That gives the poor a lot less help than they re getting now, while the rich get a tax credit they don t need.But isn t that par for the course for the GOP? Anything to help their rich buddies, and the poor can go fuck themselves, because they really should have thought of all of this before they decided to be poor. Right? Right.Wrong. That would be part of why House Republicans only want this plan to be made available to Republicans. Democrats and everyone else would rightfully blast it for what it is more help to the rich while leaving the poor in the dust.The rest of the problems likely have to do with insurance coverage and the deficit, but according to Collins, the House Health Subcommittee might vote on their bill before the Congressional Budget Office has a chance to release its score, so it s not yet clear who all (besides the poor) will be hurt. That would probably be another reason Republicans don t want anyone else seeing this.It s disgusting. It s ridiculous. It s manipulative. And it s classic Republicanism. They ve sunk to a low we didn t think they were capable of.Featured image by Win McNamee via Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1422 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, in predictable conservative fashion, has just said something extremely offensive about people who aren t wealthy white men like him.During Thursday night s GOP undercard debate, Huckabee stated that it was only common sense to treat poor people with the same punishment/reward techniques that people use to train dogs if we want to improve the economy. Huckabee claimed that because the tax system punishes them, the current system made it impossible for Americans to really get ahead. He said: If you work really hard and you start moving up the economic ladder, you get bumped into a different tax bracket so the government thinks it deserves more of your hard work than you do. It s time for something big. As an alternative, the former governor of Arkansas suggested the Fair Tax plan, which would enforce a national flat sales tax of 10 percent. It s built on the common sense with which we raised our kids and train dogs. You reward behavior you want more of. And you punish behavior you want less of. That s how I raise kids, it s how I trained our dogs. And folks, it s not that difficult. Even if you remove all offensiveness and privilege from Huckabee s suggestion that poor taxpayers should be treated with the same systems we use to train our pet dogs, Huckabee s 10 percent tax suggestion is still an awful one. Last year, the Tax Policy Center put the theory to the test and determined that Huckabee s proposed alternative would actually be more detrimental and punish the nation s poorest Americans (no surprise there). The Tax Policy Center observed: The problem is that very high-income households spend only a fraction of their income, while low- and middle-income people spend all or most of what they make. A sales tax, by design, exempts a large share of income at the top. If it includes a prebate to protect people at the bottom and doesn t add to the deficit, then it must raise taxes on people in the middle. Here s the debate footage where Huckabee talks about treating poor people like dogs:Huckabee s attitude toward poor people echoes the rest of the GOP s line of thinking. Struggling Americans are nothing to the Republican Party, and are often looked over and cast aside. If you learned anything from last night s Republican presidential debate, it s that the GOP candidates only have certain interests at heart: their own.Featured image is a screenshot | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1423 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Hillary’s Criminal Plan for the Internet Hillary’s Criminal Plan for the Internet By 0 57
You’re probably appalled at the American media’s shameless whoring for Hillary Clinton, asking yourself why they would so thoroughly debase their much-touted journalistic ethics. President Obama has answered that question.
As reported by Agence France Presse, during a recent speech in Pittsburgh he postulated:
“We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to.
“There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.”
Set aside the outrageous, un-American gall in proposing that any central authority should “curate” information put out to the public, and walk with me for a minute down a meandering path of speculation.
It is, or course, the World Wide Web in which Obama’s informational “wild-wild west” exists. This is the realm of Breitbart, Cybercast News Service, the Drudge Report , World Net Daily , American Thinker , and other non-establishment outlets that persist in making the president uncomfortable.
Current Prices on popular forms of Silver Bullion
And what has happened recently to affect the World Wide Web? The U.S. government has handed over control to ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), the nonprofit agency that assigns website domain names.
Is it in the president’s mind that ICANN might someday assume the “curating function” he sees as necessary to insure “truthiness” in web-based news reporting?
Well, according to ICANN Board Chair Stephen D. Crocker, diverse membership in the organization makes such a thing unthinkable. Quoted by the tech site C/NET, Crocker said:
“This community validated the multistakeholder model of internet governance. It has shown that a governance model defined by the inclusion of all voices, including business, academics, technical experts, civil society, governments and many others is the best way to assure that the internet of tomorrow remains as free, open and accessible as the internet of today.”
His confidence is echoed by the Internet Governance Coalition, a group of technology firms that includes Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Verizon, among others. They issued a statement that lauds ICANN’s “strong accountability measures” and upholds “the bottom-up approach that embodies the very nature of the open internet we experience today.…”
Pardon the skepticism to which I’ve become increasingly prone, but this sounds very much like the “collaborative” concept of governance that prevails in the academic world.
If you’ve ever applied for a position at a college or university, you know that what a search committee wants most urgently to know about you is whether you have a “collaborative style” of working.
What exactly is a “collaborative style,” as understood in today’s academic world? It means that you won’t do anything to contradict the orthodoxy in thought and procedure reigning on campus — in other words, that you are “politically correct” in your outlook. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1424 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: By Omar Kamel / medium.com It’s not that we see Trump any differently. Trump is an egotistical racist misogynist who, in a rational world, shouldn’t be in any position of power. Then again, neither should Hillary Clinton. We watched from afar (as ‘afar’ as the internet allows anyhow) as the 2016 presidential campaign rolled on, and, at first, we wanted Bernie Sanders to win, and were very glad to see just how much support he managed to get, but then, Bernie did two Very Bad Things; he said he was okay with Obama’s Blacklist and his usage of drone strikes, and he said that he’d support Clinton if he didn’t get the nomination. Some people held on to Bernie, but for many of us, for me, that was it. Bernie might still have claimed to be ‘better’, but he certainly couldn’t claim to be ‘good’. We also watched the political establishment ignore Bernie and shove Clinton ahead of the self described ‘socialist’. We watched as even people like John Oliver and the entire cast of Saturday Night Live attacked Trump viciously and tried to pave the way to a Clinton victory. Oliver even took it upon himself to attack and ridicule minor candidates like Stein & Johnson, but not Clinton. We watched as so-called liberals and so-called democrats made Clinton out to be a hero. We watched as all those people bent over backwards and pretended that Clinton was one of the good guys because they felt compelled to pick between the ‘lesser of two evils’. It was pathetic. There’s a bit of fatality involved here, to be sure, and a deep level of cynicism. Many of us feel that if America could not choose the best option, then it deserved the worst. Also, there’s a harsh desire for rough truth, rather than hypocritical garnish. In a sense, many Americans are Trump, but most of them like to think of themselves as closer in character to who Clinton (falsely) claims to be; liberal, democratic, leftist, humane, charitable, kind. There are some who faced the facts honestly, and admitted that, for all intents and purposes, Clinton was a criminal and a manipulator who plays ball with the worst human rights offenders on the planet (Saudi Arabia and Israel, for example) and relies on their financial and political support. They understood that when promising to continue Obama’s legacy, Clinton is in fact promising to kill another 4,000 innocent Pakistanis by drone strikes in an illegal attempt to murder untried ‘terrorists’. They understand that this is a woman for whom Madeline Albright is a role model, and Kissinger is an icon, a woman who started out Republican before swapping sides and acting as though she were a Democrat, most likely because she realized that, as a woman, she could go farther as a Democrat. This is a liar who claims to have been dodging sniper fire in a foreign land when she was being greeted with flowers . Throughout the campaign, Clinton supporters have turned a blind eye to her failings. Somehow they were more horrified by what Trump may do than what Clinton already has done. So yeah, we weren’t very excited about a Clinton victory. Nothing would change. America would continue to think itself a progressive democracy that voted in first a black man, and then a woman. The demon would continue to wear a passable face, remain…presentable. We do not think Trump is any better, but we think a Trump victory would force the USA to admit to what it has become, and would allow other countries around the world to react appropriately now that the cover has been blown. JFK put on a good mask but behind the mask he was a lying adulterer who lifted the weapons embargo on Israel, allowing the US to supply it with the weapons used against Palestinians. The so-called ‘Special Relationship’ between the USA and Israel began with JFK. His smile and charm, however, make people, even in the Arab world, look back on him with fondness. Bill Clinton was the same, all charm and smiles while he signed off on the use of military force against Americans on American soil (in Waco), and pushed the Palestinians through Oslo, and then later, in his impeachment hearings, pretended the word ‘is’ was ambiguous. The Bill Clinton I remember was an arrogant liar and a murderer, not a charming man at all. The latest in this series of supposed good guys is Obama, proudly black, but closer to what Malcolm X referred to as a ‘house nigger’. Obama did not stop the war machine, and did not close down Guantanamo. Drone usage during Obama’s time has gone up exponentially, but…he performs beautifully; he cries when school shootings take place, he laughs at himself with an anger translating sketch, he dances and raps to your pleasure, he seems cool and laid back, a great dad, a fun guy . To tens of thousands of Pakistanis though, Obama is nothing but a cold blooded murderer. To Egyptians he is just another in a long line of US presidents who support a military dictatorship, supplying it with money and weapons. To people in Yemen (the poorest Arab country), he is the man who has helped supply Saudi Arabia (ostensibly the most fascist country on Earth) with more than $100 billion in weapons with which they have destroyed Yemen. To millions of people around the world he is a bomb that happens to have a smile painted on it. And now, finally, rather than suffer the pretense of progress under a female president, America has voted for Trump. Good. Lay bare the racism, lay bare the arrogance, lay bare the lies and the brutalities. Face yourselves, see yourselves, and then maybe, maybe, things will change…
Omar Kamel - I'm not a total bastard. Under my exterior there's a nice guy, but yes - under him there's another bastard. Let's just say I'm two thirds bastard. 0.0 · | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1425 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Hillary and Bill Clinton have no shame! They ve both been lying to the American people for 30 years! From Bill s sexual exploits to Hillary s e-mails, they both have told the BIGGEST WHOOPERS that would have gotten any normal person in much more trouble! It s like the Clintons get a pass and that the rules don t apply to them ever! Sooo fast forward to Hillary s DNC acceptance speech where she tells yet another tall tale. You won t believe how she basically throws a town under the bus to make herself look like a compassionate humanitarian. The problem is that some sharp people busted her for the lie LOL! From The New Bedford Standard Times April 17, 2015 in an article by Steve Urbon:The idealistic young woman with the long hair and huge eyeglasses had just graduated from Yale Law School, the future holding nothing but potential. But instead of shipping off to a New York or Washington law firm, she joined Marian Wright Edelman s fledgling Children s Defense Fund (which Edelman, Yale Law Class of 1963, still leads).Hillary Rodham Clinton apparently would have you believe that, in 1973 she had forgone a career at a lucrative Washington D.C. law firm to instead, serve the public at Yale University s Children s Defense Fund (CDF). Not exactly the truth..but that s not the whopper I speak of yet. While she did indeed work at the CDF in New Bedford in 1973, it seemed more like Plan B than her passion, but this was her fate and it served her well. Hillary Rodham actually went for the big bucks at that dreamy law firm in D.C .but she failed to pass her bar exams in the District of Columbia, instead eventually passed them in Arkansas. In last night s acceptance speech, Secretary Clinton told a story of her experience on the South Coast of Massachusetts in the City of New Bedford as an attorney for the CDF that didn t all add up according to my radio colleague Chris McCarthy: My mother, Dorothy, was abandoned by her parents as a young girl. She ended up on her own at 14, working as a housemaid. She was saved by the kindness of others. Her first-grade teacher saw she had nothing to eat at lunch and brought extra food to share the entire year. The lesson she passed on to me, years later, stuck with me: No one gets through life alone. We have to look out for each other and lift each other up. And she made sure I learned the words from our Methodist faith: Do all the good you can, for all the people you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can. So, I went to work for the Children s Defense Fund, going door-to-door in New Bedford, Mass., on behalf of children with disabilities who were denied the chance to go to school. I remember meeting a young girl in a wheelchair on the small back porch of her house. She told me how badly she wanted to go to school it just didn t seem possible in those days. And I couldn t stop thinking of my mother and what she d gone through as a child. It became clear to me that simply caring is not enough. To drive real progress, you have to change both hearts and laws. You need both understanding and action. So we gathered facts. We built a coalition. And our work helped convince Congress to ensure access to education for all students with disabilities. Of all the mill cities in all the world..she had to pick on ours? As Chris McCarthy observed, this story has B.S. written all over it . I was coming to WBSM a bit late from my Boston Herald Radio appearance earlier this morning and by the time I had pulled into the parking lot at 10:07 a.m., Chris opened the show and had already impeached the WHOLE Hillary whale of a story (New Bedford is known as the Whaling City).Now, Chris is extremely sharp and the local reference in her story caught his attention as he watched her speak last night. We hashed over the odds of plausibility an possibilities over the next two hours. When we departed, I decided to investigate. You may see Chris on national tv later on this weekend or next week. Who knows? Here s what I learned; The Mayor of New Bedford in 1973 was a guy I happen to know, Mayor John Markey (81 years old and a lifelong Democrat now living in Dartmouth, MA. Mayor Markey is also a retired judge and a man whose credibility and character are beyond reproach. Jack as he is known, is eligible for both court and municipal pension but only accepts one. He is not one to double dip . I called Jack and asked him a few questions about handicap services in 1973 at the New Bedford Public Schools, including wheelchair accessibility. I took over as Mayor in January of 1973. We had a budget for vans with drivers and provided services to students with disabilities. It was Tremblay Bus. They would pick them up and drop them off at their homes. Now, they may not have been able to go to the local school, depending on whether or not the schools were accessible for wheelchairs but there were many schools then which could and did accommodate our handicapped students in wheelchairs . In fact, we had a local guy who was a paraplegic, injured in a diving accident who came to my office many times to advocate for the disabled and I actually spent an entire day in 1973 in a wheelchair to better understand the challenges they face everyday. Soon after that we were cutting out sidewalks for wheelchairs and doing things in New Bedford before the laws ever compelled us to. So despite the progressive and good works of the New Bedford leadership in 1973 to make the city schools and streets more handicap accessible, Hillary (no pun intended) rolled New Bedford local government under the bus last night in front of the world. And needed to lie to do it. It just didn t seem possible in those days Hillary, because it wasn t true in 1973 New Bedford. *While she did important work to expose the needs not yet met in some school districts, this was not a city without wheelchair accessible schools and services to get the students to the schools. Maybe today s Mayor Jon Mitchell will offer to find this girl in the wheelchair on that porch as he did when challenging MA Governor Charlie Baker s New Bedford anecdotal about a New Bedford fisherman, a mountain of a man who last made Baker cry. with a hardship story..which turned out to actually be true. And you thought she changed silly you. Read More: wbsm | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1426 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Was it Donald Trump who used his private plane to rescue stranded troops? Claim summaries: A story that Donald Trump personally sent out an airplane to transport hundreds of stranded U.S. Marines home is based on inaccurate information.
contextual information: In May 2016, syndicated talk radio host Sean Hannity aired an item claiming that Donald Trump had sent a plane to give 200 stranded U.S. Marines a much-needed ride home after Operation Desert Storm in 1991. When Corporal Ryan Stickney and 200 of his fellow Marines prepared to return to their families after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, a logistics error forced them to turn to a surprising source for a ride home: Donald J. Trump. Today, Stickney would like to say "thank you." Stickney, a squad leader in a TOW company of a Marine reserve unit based in Miami, FL, spent approximately six months in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War between 1990 and 1991. Upon his unit's return to the United States, the former Marine says the group spent several weeks decompressing at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina before heading back to Miami. Stickney recalls being told that a mistake had been made within the logistics unit and that an aircraft wasn't available to take the Marines home on their scheduled departure date. This, according to Stickney, is where Donald Trump comes in. "The way the story was told to us was that Mr. Trump found out about it and sent the airline down to take care of us. And that's all we knew ... I remember asking, 'Who is Donald Trump?' I truly didn't know anything about him," the former Marine said. Corporal Stickney snapped a photo to remember the day. The story came up several times during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign (Cpl. Stickney even told it in person at a Trump rally), but skeptics questioned its validity despite a statement from the Trump campaign allegedly confirming it: "The Trump campaign has confirmed to Hannity.com that Mr. Trump did indeed send his plane to make two trips from North Carolina to Miami, Florida, to transport over 200 Gulf War Marines back home. No further details were provided." The few details we do have about Trump's alleged participation don't, in fact, add up. We can confirm, based on military records, that the 209-member Anti-Tank (TOW) Company, part of the 8th Tank Battalion for Operation Desert Shield, deployed to Camp LeJeune, North Carolina, from their home base in Miami on 26 November 1990. We can also confirm that the company deployed from Camp LeJeune to Saudi Arabia on 22 December, served throughout the combat phase of Operation Desert Storm (from 17 January to 28 February 1991), and returned to North Carolina in April. A command chronology of the deployment notes that a "Cpl. Stickney" was among those receiving certificates of commendation. We can also confirm, via a 23 April 1991 article from the Sun-Sentinel, that a series of flight delays stalled the company's homecoming to Miami on 22 April, but that they finally did arrive home after being split across two separate flights. Stickney's photograph shows that he arrived on a plane marked "Trump," but it also proves something else: that even if Trump did send the plane, it wasn't his private jet. That Trump didn't send the pictured plane at all was something noted by a sharp-eyed reader, who wrote to us to note: First, that's not Trump's private 727 jet; it's one of the jets in the Trump Shuttle fleet. I wondered if maybe Trump's jet back in those days was painted differently, so I researched his private jet as of April 1991. I found that Trump was deep in the red financially and having to liquidate assets, one of which was his personal 727. The sale of that jet was finalized in the first week of May 1991, making it highly unlikely he was also flying reservists around while discussing the sale at the end of April. The markings of the plane in Stickney's photo match those of the Trump Shuttle fleet, so the question becomes: Did Trump himself send a Trump Shuttle to retrieve the stranded Marines, or was it procured some other way? To arrive at an answer, it's necessary to go into a bit of the history of Trump Shuttle. A July 2015 article in NYC Aviation detailed Trump's short-lived airline industry involvement, beginning with an entirely separate carrier, Eastern Air Shuttle, which he immediately rebranded with his own name. CEO Frank Lorenzo began selling off assets, including the prized Shuttle operation. Donald Trump placed a winning bid for the Shuttle, its aircraft, and landing slots at LaGuardia and National for $380 million, financed through no less than 22 banks. The newly branded Trump Shuttle took to the skies on June 7, 1989. Timing is everything in business, and unfortunately for Trump, he entered the airline game at the wrong time. The U.S. entered an economic recession in the late '80s, leading many corporations to cut back on business travel. In addition, tensions in the Middle East leading up to the first Gulf War caused oil prices to spike. This 1-2 punch was devastating for the airline industry and led to the demise of several airlines, including Eastern and Pan Am. Given these circumstances, the Trump Shuttle lost money, and with Trump continuing to accumulate debt in his other ventures, it was becoming increasingly difficult to pay back the loans taken to purchase the airline. In September 1990, Trump defaulted on his loan, and control of the airline went back to the banks led by Citibank. Given that the bankers, not Donald Trump, owned Trump Shuttle from September 1990 until it was sold to U.S. Air in 1996, Trump wasn't in a position to send the planes anywhere, much less on a spur-of-the-moment Marine transport mission. So who did? As it turns out, the U.S. military itself chartered the flights—a common practice in the day, according to an 11 August 2016 report by The Washington Post. Lt. Gen. Vernon J. Kondra, now retired, was in charge of all military airlift operations. He said that relying on commercial carriers freed up military cargo aircraft for equipment transport. Kondra's notes on the flight are declassified and available online and show a contract for Trump Shuttle to "move troops in [the] continental United States" during the 1990-91 timeframe. There are several references to a 1990-91 contract for Trump Shuttle to carry personnel across the United States, between the East and West Coasts, on a standard LaGuardia-Dover-Charleston-Travis-Chord-Kelly-Dover-LaGuardia run. "It worked very well, and the crews loved it, and really thought that we'd done something special for them," Kondra recalled in the oral history. "It was a helluva lot better than using 141s [cargo craft], which we could use for something else." But Kondra said that the notion that Trump personally arranged to help the stranded soldiers made little sense. "I certainly was not aware of that. It does not sound reasonable that it would happen like that. It would not fit in with how we did business. I don't even know how he would have known there was a need." So the real story underlying the claim that Donald Trump personally sent his jet to pick up stranded soldiers and return them to the U.S. is that the military paid to charter a plane from an airline Trump no longer owned in order to bring those service personnel home. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1427 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: As U.S. President Donald Trump left Beijing on Friday for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam, first lady Melania stayed behind to play tourist, viewing pandas at a zoo and visiting the Great Wall of China. At the Beijing Zoo, the 47-year-old former model fed a giant panda named Gu Gu and learned about his nutrition and training. She greeted a group of school children waving miniature Chinese and American flags, handing out stuffed toy eagles after watching the children sing a Chinese folk song at the panda enclosure. “Thank you very much,†she said. Melania then signed a panda print, writing: “Thank you to the Beijing Zoo! Wonderful to meet Gu Gu! Melania Trumpâ€. Later in the afternoon, Melania walked along part of the Mutianyu section of the more than 20,000-km (12,400-mile) long Great Wall, a UNESCO World Heritage Site where China frequently takes visiting heads of state and their spouses. As with previous first ladies, Melania has used her platform to champion public causes, such as the prevention of childhood bullying and combating the opioid epidemic in the United States. Playing a prominent supporting role on the president’s multi-leg Asia visit, she won praise on Chinese social media, with comparisons to China’s glamorous first lady, Peng Liyuan, and comments on her apparent ease in navigating the ancient cobblestones of the Forbidden City in super-high stilettos upon arrival in Beijing on Wednesday. Accompanied by Peng, Melania watched a cultural performance, painted pandas and participated in a cooking class at a primary school on Thursday. Many on China’s Twitter-like Weibo applauded Melania’s grace and sense of style, as well as her cultural sensitivity. In China, she wore mostly austere coats and dark gowns from Dolce & Gabbana and Alexander McQueen, in contrast with her magenta Delpozo outfit and electric-blue heels upon landing in South Korea days before. But most in China said they remained bigger fans of their own first lady, often affectionately referred to online as Peng Mama, which roughly translates as Mother Peng. “I still think Mama oozes more grace, while also exuding a motherly air!†one Weibo poster said. Chinese social media sites are policed more heavily than normal during important political events, with negative or sensitive matter swiftly blocked or removed by internet censors. As Trump departed, he said on Twitter his wife’s next stop would be Alaska, where she would “greet our AMAZING troopsâ€. However, Trump’s daughter and adviser Ivanka, who is very popular in China, did not accompany her father, to the disappointment of fans. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1428 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Can You Exchange Used Candles at Bath & Body Works? Claim summaries: Such claims have been circulating on the internet since at least 2018.
contextual information: For years, the retail company Bath & Body Works has made headlines for its generous return policy. On Sept. 17, 2021, social media user Kristen Peden appeared to take advantage of that policy when she claimed in a series of Facebook posts that she exchanged three used items, including one used candle, at a Tennessee Bath & Body Works for new items. At the time of this writing, the post had garnered 90,000 shares. Questions surrounding the policy have circulated on social media since at least 2018 and have appeared in coverage by publications like The List and on Reddit in 2019. The List posted in 2019, "Is it true that you can return used candles and swap them out for new ones? Or is it a YMMV [your mileage may vary] situation?" Most reports claimed that if a customer keeps the receipt, they can return anything for any reason. Even without the receipt, customers could expect to receive store credit at the very least. At Bath & Body Works, you can return anything you buy, at any time, for any reason. If you have your receipt, you may get a refund. If you don't, you'll likely receive store credit, wrote Good Housekeeping in 2018. But does that apply to used items? Likely not. A look at the Bath & Body Works return policy showed that an empty product cannot be returned solely on the grounds that it has been used. "We just want you to love it! Return anything, anytime for any reason. 100% Guaranteed," wrote the company. "If at any time you're not completely satisfied with the quality of our products, you may return them to any of our Bath & Body Works or White Barn Stores in the US for a full refund, subject to the terms of our Return Policy." In a subsequent post, Peden corrected her earlier statement to note that the warranty extended to ANY EMPTY CONTAINER FROM THIS STORE: PERFUMES, SOAPS, LOTIONS, CANDLES!!!! An update posted the same day said that she had gone to the store in question with her mother and successfully exchanged several items. In the above post, Peden shared a photo of what appears to be her receipt (number 81217003463409172021) that showed three items returned without their original receipt and exchanged for three differently named items, including a candle, of the same value. The location listed on the receipt was for a store located at 373 W. Jackson Street in Cookeville, Tennessee. Snopes sent the receipt to Bath & Body Works, and a company spokesperson confirmed that the customer returned a body cream, a fine fragrance mist, and a candle and received the same items in return. They were not able to determine whether any of the products had been used but did refer our team to a return policy that noted Bath & Body Works only accepts products that do not perform properly. "Our return policy is intended to help customers who have issues related to poor product performance or unsatisfactory customer experience and is not intended to be taken advantage of when a product performs as expected. If a product has been fully used, it would seem that it has met its performance expectations," read the policy. While it is true that Peden returned three items to a Bath & Body Works location in Tennessee in exchange for three items of equal value, we were unable to confirm whether the candle exchanged was actually completely used. Snopes followed up with the company to further confirm the condition of the exchanged items, but until we hear back, we have rated this claim Unproven. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1429 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Does This Picture Show a Drone Photo 'We're Not Supposed to See'? Claim summaries: Online advertisements promised answers for what appeared to be a large nest or other object hanging on top of a telephone pole or power lines.
contextual information: Since at least July 2021, online advertisements have displayed the words: "[Pics] Drone Captures Photos We're Not Supposed to See." It showed a purported drone photograph of a massive nest or other object hanging off a telephone pole or power lines. The ads appeared to promise answers. For example, this ad appeared next to an article on the 10news.com website. 10news.com The ad showed a strange object blanketing power lines or a telephone pole. A variation of the ad said: "Drone Snaps Photos No One Should Ever See." A third version read: "Photos That Can Give You A New Perspective." They were sponsored by the Definition.org website, which has quite the track record for misleading clickbait. The ad was hosted by the Outbrain advertising network. quite the track record misleading clickbait Clicking on the ads led to a 39-page slideshow article and a headline that read: "Drone Photos Taken In Mid Air Will Have You Feeling Uneasy." article The article contained several photographs that appeared to be shot from the air, whether by a drone, helicopter, or airplane. One claimed it showed the aftermath of a residential explosion. Another described a shot that was purportedly captured over Barcelona, Spain. We also found a picture that was said to show volcanic activity in Iceland. a residential explosion Another Barcelona, Spain picture Iceland We clicked through all 39 pages. The article never mentioned the photograph from the ad. It was clickbait. We clicked "next page" nearly 40 times so you dont have to. The picture in the ad was not captured high in the sky using a drone. It appeared to be shot on the ground by artist and photographer Dillon Marsh of Dillon Marsh Photography. We found no credit to Marsh on the Definition.org website. Dillon Marsh Dillon Marsh Photography The picture showed a large birds' nest for the sociable weaver, built on a telephone pole. The bird species lives in the Kalahari region of southern Africa. sociable weaver Sociable weavers in Lijjersdraai Picnic Site at Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in Northern Cape, South Africa. (Courtesy: Bernard Dupont/Flickr) The only place they can be found in the United States is with the San Diego Zoo. The zoo described the nests built by sociable weavers as providing enough living space for an "entire colony as well as for future residents." The nests can hold up to 400 birds and can potentially last an entire century. described Weaver birds' nests on the top of telegraph and telephone poles in the Namib desert region of southwest Africa. (Courtesy: Matt Mawson/Getty Images) Nests built by the species are made from large twigs, dry grasses, straw, soft plants, cotton, fur, and fluff. The zoo also published that a "proper nesting tree has a long, smooth trunk and high branches to discourage slithering predators." This is perhaps what makes a telephone pole the perfect trunk for sociable weavers. The nests keep the sociable weavers cool in the summer and warm on cold nights. They welcome other birds inside, such as the South African pygmy falcon, pied barbet, familiar chat, red-headed finch, ashy tit, and rosy-faced lovebird. Vultures, eagles, and owls can also sometimes be seen on top of the nests. The added company is said to make for a more secure home from predators. A view from underneath a sociable weaver nest. (Courtesy: Rui Ornelas/Flickr) As for food, the zoo's page about the sociable weaver said that they "need less water than any other bird" and that "most never take a drink." They get their moisture from bugs. For more on the species, visit the San Diego Zoo website. San Diego Zoo website Several other photographs of the nests can be viewed on the Getty Images website. Several other photographs nests viewed In sum, ads promised to reveal something about a strange drone photograph that "we're not supposed to see." The long articles that resulted from the ads never mentioned the picture. In reality, it was shot from ground level and showed a massive nest built on a telephone pole by sociable weavers. Note: Photographs from Flickr are credited to Bernard Dupont and Rui Ornelas. Matt Mawson shot the Getty Images picture. The photograph in the ad, which went uncredited by the advertiser, appeared to originally be captured by Dillon Marsh. Bernard Dupont Rui Ornelas Matt Mawson Dillon Marsh Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1430 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Facebook Scam Pushes Fake Giveaway for Ninja Foodi Cooker Claim summaries: A Facebook post congratulated users and misleadingly claimed that they had won a brand new Ninja Foodi MAX 15-in-1 SmartLid Multi-Cooker.
contextual information: On Sept. 21, 2022, we reviewed a misleading Facebook post that claimed multiple users had won a brand new Ninja Foodi MAX 15-in-1 SmartLid Multi-Cooker. The post was made on a page named Blue Light Card, which showed the unrelated category of "Wine/spirits." All of this was nothing more than another scam that led to a seemingly endless number of surveys that promised other prizes. The post originally read as follows: CONGRATULATIONS for those of you who have received comments from me have been selected as winners???Step 1 = Like and ShareStep 2 = Register here ? https://tinyurl.com/2ej2cd6uStep 3 = Coments "DONE" receive my prize. And the Gift will be sent after you successfully register (this is authentic and official) God bless you Good Luck. #bluelightcardcontest#entertowincontest_bluelightcard#entertowincontestbluelightcard The Facebook page that pushed this scam appeared to have been removed shortly before we published this story. Facebook The product was once featured in an official video from the company, Ninja Kitchen. It retails for around 299 pounds in the U.K., which would make it a pricey item to give out to multiple users for free. official video 299 pounds In sum, we recommend avoiding any promotions, giveaways, or contests on Facebook that ask users to like, comment, and share. The only exception to this rule would be if the post came from a page that has a verified badge. A page that's verified presumably would mean that a promotion would be trustworthy. Other than that, we generally advise that readers avoid prize offers that seem too good to be true. verified badge | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1431 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Melania Trump Criticizes Charlottesville Violence, Plagiarizes Michelle Obama? Claim summaries: An image positing that First Lady Melania Trump again copied words from Michelle Obama while denouncing violence in Charlottesville is likely a spoof.
contextual information: On 12 August 2017, First Lady Melania Trump publicly responded to violent events that had taken place earlier that day at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, by tweeting the following: violent events Our country encourages freedom of speech, but let's communicate w/o hate in our hearts. No good comes from violence. #Charlottesville #Charlottesville Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) August 12, 2017 August 12, 2017 In mid-2016, Mrs. Trump had been the subject of fierce criticism for delivering a speech before the Republican National Convention which included passages identical in content and specific phrasing to an address given before the Democratic National Convention in 2008 by Michelle Obama. That event prompted a good number of spoof items posted online that played on the idea of various prominent political figures plagiarizing each other's words. criticism spoof items posted Shortly after the 12 August 2017 statement referenced above was posted to the First Lady's Twitter feed, another image began circulating online positing that Melania Trump had likewise taken those words (without credit) from a comment made by former First Lady Michelle Obama over a year earlier: Although we can't yet absolutely rule out the possibility that Mrs. Obama might at some time have expressed something like the thought attributed to her here, we have found no record of her having done so (on 16 April 2016 or any other day) and suspect that this image is just a spoof of the earlier convention speech controversy. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1432 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday the United States would maintain sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela until they restore political and religious freedom. We re confronting rogue regimes from Iran to North Korea and we are challenging the communist dictatorship of Cuba and the socialist oppression of Venezuela, Trump told a conservative political conference. And we will not lift the sanctions on these repressive regimes until they restore political and religious freedom for their people. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1433 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: The pension fund in the city of Providence is only 30 percent funded, about the same level as when he [Taveras] took office.
contextual information: Public employee pensions have been a hot topic in the 2014 primary race for governor because two of the Democratic candidates have had to deal with underfunded plans. During theAug. 26, 2014 Providence Journal - WPRI debatebetween Democrats Clay Pell, General Treasurer Gina Raimondo and Providence Mayor Angel Taveras, Raimondo and Taveras swapped barbs about who has administered their respective pension funds most effectively. Taveras, who got concessions from the city's unions, said the state pension fund is underperforming and paying excessive fees. Raimondo, whose changes in the state fund sparked a lawsuit that remains unresolved, countered that we have great returns with lower risk, and she fired back at Taveras. The pension fund in the city of Providence is only 30-percent funded, about the same level as when he [Taveras] took office, she said. [I] fixed a system for the long term. He made small changes and the pension system in Providence is still in crisis. (The U.S. Government Accountability Office recommends that public pension plans should be atleast 80 percent funded.) We were curious about what the trend has been in Providence and whether the funding has gone down. We asked the Raimondo campaign for its evidence. Spokesman Eric Hyers sent us links to two documents. The first wasa Jan. 19, 2012 reportfrom Providence's pension adviser, Buck Consultants, which tracks funding going back to 1994, when the city had 57.4 percent of the pension money it needed. Since then, the overall trend has been down. The funded ratio had plummeted to 39.3 percent by the last full fiscal year Vincent A. Buddy Cianci Jr. was in office. It had dropped to 34.1 percent by June 30, 2010, when David Cicilline, now a U.S. representative, was in his last year. A year later, when Taveras had been in office for six months, the funded ratio had dropped to 31.94 percent. The second document was theJan. 31, 2014 valuation reportby the city's new pension adviser, Segal Consulting. It reports that as of June 30, 2013, with Taveras in office two and a half years, the funded ratio was virtually the same -- 31.39 percent. And this was after Taveras won union concessions to reduce pension costs. By comparison, the funded ratio for the state employees plan went from48.4 percentin June 2010, before Raimondo took office, to56.2 percentas of June 30, 2013 in the most recent audit. Michael D'Amico, Taveras' former director of administration who is now a budget consultant for the city, said it was a complete oversimplification to imply that the changes were small because the funded ratio didn't change significantly. The actual cost of the pension system was reduced substantially by negotiating changes such as a 10-year suspension of cost-of-living raises and the elimination of 5- and 6-percent compounded cost of living adjustments, DAmico said. We got just about as much as we possibly could have without cutting pensions, said Taveras spokesman David Ortiz. In a sense, the administration faced a choice: do we push Providence into bankruptcy to give a receiver the ability to cut pensions? The mayor believed the cost and collateral damage of pushing Rhode Islands capital city into bankruptcy was not worth extra pension savings we would have been able to pursue, Ortiz said. Said D'Amico: If we hadn't done anything, the funded ratio would have been much lower. Our ruling When Raimondo said, The pension fund in the city of Providence is only 30 percent funded, about the same level as when he [Taveras] took office, she was only off by one percentage point, according to the most recent audit of the fund. That funded ratio has not increased since Taveras was sworn in on Jan. 3, 2011. But that percentage was on a downward spiral at the time, so having it stabilize at 31 percent doesn't necessarily reflect small changes, as Raimondo claimed in the debate. And the changes negotiated between Taveras and the citys unions are intended to gradually increase the funding ratio. Because the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, we rate itMostly True. (If you have a claim youd likePolitiFact Rhode Islandto check, email us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.) | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1434 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Episode #126 of SUNDAY WIRE SHOW resumes this Sunday March 13, 2016 as host Patrick Henningsen broadcasts 3 HOURS of power-packed talk radio LIVE on ACR LISTEN LIVE ON THIS PAGE AT THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULED SHOW TIMES:SUNDAYS 5pm-8pm UK Time | 12pm-3pm ET (US) | 9am-12pm PT (US)This week s very special edition of THE SUNDAY WIRE is broadcasting LIVE with host Patrick Henningsen covering the top news stories internationally. In the first hour we cover America s wild 2016 primary election race and Donald Trump s 1968 moment which took place in Chicago this week, as well as the accelerating agenda in Libya. At the 30 min mark we ll feature this week s SHOUT! Poll on freedom of speech and assembly. In the second hour we re joined by writer Matthew Richer to discuss America s explosive Trump paradigm. In third hour we connect with Basil Valentine for a breakdown of US voter and election fraud, Germany s migrant crisis, Brexit and the coming summer of uncertainty. Is it 1968 all over again?SHOUT! POLL: SHOULD PROTESTERS BE ALLOWED TO SHUT DOWN POLITICAL RALLIES? VOTE HERE.Strap yourselves in and lower the blast shield this is your brave new world *NOTE: THIS EPISODE MAY CONTAIN STRONG LANGUAGE AND MATURE THEMES* // <![CDATA[ broadstreet.zone(46707); // ]]> | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1435 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Meanwhile, most Americans can t afford to take a single vacation Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained records from the U.S. Department of the Air Force revealing that Barack Obama s February and March 2015 travel for golf vacations and fundraisers totaled $4,436,245.50 in taxpayer-funded transportation expenses. The documents regarding the Obama travel expenses came in response to two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests filed by Judicial Watch.To date, the Secret Service has not provided requested information, as required by FOIA, regarding security costs.Using the Air Force s official cost estimate of $206,337 per hour, the newly released records obtained by Judicial Watch show:Obama s February 14, 2015, golf outing to Palm Springs required a five-hour flight, costing taxpayers a total of $1,031,685. Transportation for Obama s February 19 day trip to Chicago cost taxpayers $619,011.00. Transportation for Obama s March 2015 fundraising trip to Los Angeles cost taxpayers $1,980,835.20. Obama s March 28, 2015, golf outing to Palm city required a 3.9-hour flight, costing taxpayers $804,870.30. In Palm Springs, Obama played golf at the luxurious Sunnylands country club, located on the former estate of the late ambassadors Walter and Leonore Annenberg. Obama reportedly spent the weekend on the exclusive, gated property, where he has twice stayed before.Obama s February trip to Chicago was billed by the White House as a non-political event to declare the Pullman Historic District a national monument. But, press reports indicated that the trip was heavily political. In a CNN story entitled, Obama gives Emanuel re-election boost: President Barack Obama went to Chicago bearing gifts Thursday for his former chief of staff, Mayor Rahm Emanuel But the day had all the trappings of a campaign and Obama even made an unannounced stop at a Kenwood campaign office for Emanuel on his way out of town. I m glad he s my mayor, and I m glad he s going to be my mayor for another four years, Obama told volunteers.Obama s travel to California was solely to raise money for the Democratic National Committee and to show his support for fellow Democrats nationwide. His visit to Los Angeles began with an appearance on ABC s late night comedy program Jimmy Kimmel Live, and continued on to include a roundtable discussion fundraiser hosted at the Santa Monica home of ICM Partners cofounder Chris Silbermann and his wife Julia Franz. Guests paid up to $33,400 per couple for attendance, donations that will be used to aid DNC activities during the approaching 2016 election cycle. Obama s March 12 fundraising trip to Los Angeles was his 32nd fundraiser in L.A. County since he became president.In Palm City, Obama played golf at the spectacular Floridian National Golf Club, where members pay a $50,000 initiation fee and $15,000 in annual dues. According to the resort s website, This stunning, yet formidable par 71 will certainly impress. At 7,114 yards, the 18-hole course offers perfectly manicured rolling fairways and greens, demanding hazards, breathtaking views of the St. Lucie River, and is surrounded by natural preserve and native wildlife. Taxpayers should be outraged that Barack Obama s wastes 4.4 million of their precious tax dollars on golf vacations and political fundraising, said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. And to make matters worse, the Secret Service has simply refused to respond to our requests for documents about the security costs of these controversial trips. The Obama travel scandal is about abuse of office, abuse of the taxpayer, and contempt for the rule of law. Records released earlier this year by Judicial Watch showed that Michelle Obama s 2014 trip to China cost more than $360,000 in air transportation costs. Judicial Watch uncovered an expensive combination of trips by the Obamas to Africa and Honolulu, which cost taxpayers $15,885,585.30 in flight expenses. The single largest prior known expense for accommodations was for Michelle Obama s side-trip to Dublin, Ireland, during the 2013 G-8 conference in Belfast, when she and her entourage booked 30 rooms at the five-star Shelbourne Hotel, with the first lady staying in the 1500 square-foot Princess Grace suite at a cost of $3,500 a night. The total cost to taxpayers for the Obamas Ireland trip was $7,921,638.66. To date, the known travel expenses of the Obamas and Vice President Joe Biden exceed $61million. Via: Judicial Watch | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1436 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Trump administration will not issue executive orders calling for a review of international treaties and U.S. funding of the United Nations and other international bodies “at this time,†a senior U.S. administration official said on Friday. The Trump administration was preparing executive orders that would review U.S. funding of the United Nations and other international organizations and certain forms of multilateral treaties, the New York Times reported on Wednesday. “We remain committed to supporting the useful and necessary work performed by such organizations and alliances, and look forward to continuing that support,†the official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. “While no executive orders on these subjects are expected at this time, this president and his administration intend to be watchful stewards of the American people’s interests and of the American taxpayer’s dollars,†the official added. It was immediately clear why the orders were being shelved. According to one draft executive order published by The Daily Beast, Trump wants a committee, including his secretary of state, attorney general and director of national intelligence, to carry out a one-year review of U.S. funding to international organizations with the aim of almost halving voluntary funding. The United States is the largest contributor to the United Nations, paying 22 percent of the $5.4 billion core U.N. budget and 28 percent of the $7.9 billion U.N. peacekeeping budget. These are assessed contributions | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1437 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Waking Times
“How could one person like myself be able to do what we in the business call regime change?” ~Steve Pieczenik
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger, Steve Pieczenik has a long history as an expert in psychological warfare and was a diplomat to Soviet Russia helping to instigate the collapse of the megalithic communist state in 1991. In a recently released video he speaks on the role the American government played in manipulating Soviet culture and leadership to bring about a silent coup, or bloodless regime change, offering insight that is especially relevant in the present context of U.S. politics.
Pieczenik explains the effectiveness of soft strategies as tools for destabilizing the U.S.S.R., noting firstly how religion was used externally to bring about an internal rise in the Russian Orthodox religion to undermine the atheist regime in the Kremlin.
A second soft tactic by the U.S. was to demonstrate for top Soviet military leaders the effectiveness of modern U.S. weaponry against Soviet tanks and other weapons systems. This allowed Soviet leaders to grasp the dominance of power already in play, effectively neutralizing the Soviet military without having to actually engage in warfare.
“A third element was creating economic hardship for the Soviet Union which they really could not comprehend,” says Pieczenik, who explains how Reagan’s funding of the Strategic Defense Initiative , or SDI, was largely a tactic of smoke and mirrors to force the Soviets to respond by over-spending on obsolete defense programs. It was a bluffed cold war arms race, aimed at destabilizing the financial systems of the Soviet Union.
The fourth component of regime change, of which Pieczenik was greatly concerned, was cultural, involving the creation of a fissure between the younger and older generations in Soviet Russia, achieved primarily by exposing Russians to American rock and roll music, which was, at the time, highly revolutionary for the Soviet culture.
The fifth element was the process of negotiations that took place between the Soviet politburo and American intelligence agencies for the deconstruction of the communist elements of the Soviet state, initiating the sequence of events that became known as perestroika . This was systemic and psychological warfare and negotiation with members of the government and Soviet elite, which neutralized the Soviet Union allowing for a collapse of the communist component. A regime change. Silent Coup in America Today?
We see hints of many of these same elements at play in American politics today.
Recent revelations made public by Wikileaks impacted the result of the 2016 election. The timing of the releases and the overtly partisan nature of their contents, targeting only the Democrat campaign, revealed a clear bias, opening the door to speculation of a connection between Julian Assange and deeper state actors in both the Russian and the American intelligence communities.
The primary defensive play of the Democrats was to blame Russia without ever providing specific evidence of Russia’s involvement in the leaks, yet some analysts indicated that the NSA was the source of the leaks , and that a silent coup had been initiated by the U.S. intelligence community covertly working to prevent a Clinton win.
Now, after the election, the manipulation of the body politic continues as protests organized by political front groups funded by the likes of billionaire social engineer George Soros continue, and resistance to a Trump presidency picks up steam.
The nation is clearly being manipulated by off-screen actors on both sides of the stage. Is there an attempted silent coup happening right before our eyes in the United States?
Many of the elements of regime change noted by Pieczenik are visibly in play in America today. Religion is weaponized as Islam is being used by globalists as an invincible enemy. There are signs of a new arms race as both Russia and China demonstrate new military capabilities and global assertiveness. Economic warfare is in play as the banking and financial crisis created by central banks continues to destabilize the financial system. There are elements of a cultural war in the U.S. as millennials and so-called social justice warriors are attempting to disrupt civil discourse, essentially advocating for the end of free speech . And as we see in recent election events, there is some type of negotiation taking place behind the scenes in American politics between several factions.
In the end, the American people may very well be at the mercy of those who are maneuvering to drastically alter the social, cultural and political environment in the U.S. Unfortunately these maneuvers would only lead to greater system of control and authoritarianism than we already have, unless the body politic wakes up refuses to allow themselves to be weaponized and used as pawns by the oligarchy . Read more articles by Dylan Charles . About the Author
Dylan Charles is a student and teacher of Shaolin Kung Fu, Tai Chi and Qi Gong, a practitioner of Yoga and Taoist arts, and an activist and idealist passionately engaged in the struggle for a more sustainable and just world for future generations. He is the editor of WakingTimes.com , the proprietor of OffgridOutpost.com , a grateful father and a man who seeks to enlighten others with the power of inspiring information and action. He may be contacted at . This article ( Silent Coup in the USA? Former Diplomat Explains How Soft Regime Change Works ) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Dylan Charles and WakingTimes.com . It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.
~~ Help Waking Times to raise the vibration by sharing this article with friends and family… | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1438 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: No, This Wind Turbine Didn't Melt in Texas Heat Claim summaries: It's certainly hot in Texas, but not quite that hot.
contextual information: In mid-June 2021, Snopes readers inquired about memes posted on social media that purportedly showed a wind turbine that had melted in the scorching Texas heat (some versions sent in by readers claimed the turbine had melted in Nebraska). The National Weather Service in Houston tweeted an image of the turbine in question on June 14, 2021. The turbine, located in Wadsworth, a community southwest of Houston, was damaged by powerful winds during a storm in the area. Claims about turbines failing during extreme weather events in Texas have been a topic of interest in the past. In February 2021, conservative commentators and legislators falsely claimed that frozen turbines played a major role in the loss of power to millions of Texans as they experienced record cold temperatures. As we reported at that time, half of Texas' wind turbines went offline during the cold snap, but they accounted for only a small fraction of the power outage, which was mostly caused by the failure of systems producing power from natural gas, coal, and nuclear sources. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1439 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 0 comments
Not a lot of teenage boys would go out of their selfish ways to stand up for a teacher like this. He stood up for his teacher when his peer punched her in the face. This young man is certainly respectable!
A shocking video has emerged showing the moment a protective student knocked out a classmate who had just attacked their female teacher. The footage shows that the teacher was trying to break up a fight between two students – one in a red hoodie and one in a black hoodie – when the boy in the red turns around and hits her in the face. The teacher, dressed in white and wearing glasses, appears to fall to the ground after being hit, and then leaves the classroom.
Then, a third student comes in and punches the boy in head, sending him straight down to the ground. The third student is heard saying: ‘Watch the f— out, you just hit the fucking teacher.’ He then adds: ‘Chill your s—, you just hit the f—ing teacher, you don’t f—ing do that. Who the f— do you think you are?’
The teacher then reappears in the room, and appears relatively unscathed. She tells the group to stop fighting and separate.‘He just f—ing hit you, that’s not cool,’ says the boy that came to her defense.‘It’s not cool,’ the teacher replies. It is unclear where the video was filmed or what school was involved, however the clip was spreading quickly on social media on Wednesday after appearing on the website LiveLeak. Some viewers questioned whether the boy in red may have mistakenly hit the teacher, believing she were the other one of the students. However others said he clearly meant to hit the woman.
Shout out to the boy for standing up for what is right! Related Items | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1440 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: APOCALYPSE NOW: Trump Voters Warn Of ‘Revolution’ If Clinton Wins By Andrew Bradford on October 28, 2016 Subscribe
There’s nothing wrong with being passionate when it comes to your political beliefs and the candidate you support. In an electorate as deeply divided as we currently see in this country, you expect no less. But ask yourself this question: If your candidate loses, are you ready to take up arms and try to overthrow the government? For some who ardently support GOP nominee Donald Trump, the answer is a resounding yes.
Take for example Jared Halbrook, who lives in Green Bay, Wisconsin, and told the New York Times : “People are going to march on the capitols. They’re going to do whatever needs to be done to get her out of office, because she does not belong there. “If push comes to shove, (Clinton) has to go by any means necessary, it will be done.”
Roger Pillath said he also sees violence on the horizon if Clinton is elected: “It’s not what I’m going to do, but I’m scared that the country is going to go into a riot. I’ve never seen the country so divided, just black and white — there’s no compromise whatsoever. The Clinton campaign says together we are stronger, but there’s no together. The country has never been so divided. I’m looking at revolution right now.”
As Trump continues to talk of the election being “rigged,” his words are having an effect on people like Paul Swick, who had this ominous warning: “If she comes after the guns, it’s going to be a rough, bumpy road. I hope to God I never have to fire a round, but I won’t hesitate to. As a Christian, I want reformation. But sometimes reformation comes through bloodshed.”
Retired truck driver Alan Weegens envisions a very dark future for the United States and says he’s ready to do whatever is necessary: “I am not going to take my weapon to go out into the streets to protest an election I did not win. But I think that if certain events came about, a person would need to protect themselves, depending on where they lived, when your neighborhood goes up in flames.”
See if you can recall the last time we heard this kind of violent talk which led to actions by far right nuts who were inspired to be “heroes” in their own minds. The year was 1995 and Bill Clinton was President. Timothy McVeigh parked a rental truck loaded with explosives outside the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and killed 168 innocent Americans, including children. Words can have consequences.
Featured Image Via PBS About Andrew Bradford
Andrew Bradford is a single father who lives in Atlanta. A member of the Christian Left, he has worked in the fields of academia, journalism, and political consulting. His passions are art, music, food, and literature. He believes in equal rights and justice for all. To see what else he likes to write about, check out his blog at Deepleftfield.info. Connect | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1441 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Has the Government Banned School Students Bringing Sack Lunches from Home? Claim summaries: Has the federal government banned public school students from bringing sack lunches to school?
contextual information: Claim: The federal government has banned public school students from bringing sack lunches to school. Examples: [Collected via e-mail, October 2013] Naturalcuresnotmedicine.com posted an article indicating that the "Feds" are prohibiting school lunches from home without doctor's orders. Is this true or false? When and where? Is it true that the federal government won't allow parents to pack lunches for preschool kids without a doctor's note? It doesn't even sound slightly true to me, but it's being tossed around the internet. Origins: Intermittent rumors about imminent government control of school lunches (and specifically, a ban on lunches brought in from home) have popped up across the internet since 2011, and claims about the imposition of a government ban on brown bag lunches have continued to circulate since. Mentions of home lunch bans began cropping up on the Internet as early as 2011, with the pattern of this cyclical rumor appearing to be consistent: A parent packs a lunch, receives a note from a teacher or school official informing them of a district or program policy regarding lunches from home, and the note circulates as proof that the "feds" are sweeping in to seize control of the cafeteria. Back in 2001, one Chicago-area school called Little Village Academy banned home lunches. The Chicago Tribune covered the minor controversy, explaining that the school's principal (not the federal government) had instituted the rule at his school only after watching students bring lunches consisting of "bottles of soda and flaming hot chips" on field trips. The rumor about federal lunch bans died down a bit after 2011 but picked up again in 2013 when a mom blog relayed the story of a friend in Virginia who had received a note from her child's school about packed lunches. The note, which was quickly reproduced on a number of prominent natural news and conspiracy sites, read: "I have received word from Federal Programs Preschool pertaining to lunches from home. Parents are to be informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition requiring a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. I am sorry for any inconvenience. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Stephanie [redacted], the Health Coordinator for Federal Programs Preschool at [redacted]." Perhaps due to the start of the school year, the same story began to circulate in September 2014, with the same image and text attached. Given the timing and the return to classrooms for the majority of America's kids, it's no surprise the tale has once more gained traction and begun to spread virally on social media sites. When the story first began to travel across the social web, the Director of Communications and Public Relations for Henrico County Public Schools responded to an inquiry on this particular incident with a statement noting that schools receiving funds to participate in the federal Head Start Nutrition Assistance Programs must provide meals to schoolchildren at no cost to their parents, and allowing schoolkids to bring their own lunches from home would (barring special medical requirements) violate that requirement: "It is Head Start policy, not Henrico County Public Schools policy, that there cannot be any costs to parents associated with the program, meals or otherwise. Parents packing a lunch is considered a 'cost' by Head Start. As a result, every year parents are informed that students can only bring lunches from home if there is a medical condition that merits a specific diet, along with a physician's note to that regard. Meals served by the school conform to USDA nutritional requirements along with cultural, religious, and personal preferences on a case-by-case basis. Parents are always welcome to discuss their children's dietary needs with our health coordinator. While many disagree with this particular Head Start (HS) performance standard by which we are regulated and funded, as good stewards of federal dollars, it is protecting one of our most at-risk populations and operating at the highest level of expectation with all of the funding strands we utilize for Pre-K. Additionally, parents are made aware of the policy as stated in the preschool parent handbook upon entrance to the program and are required to sign that they have received and read it. The family advocates go over it with them in some of their initial meetings with parents. As indicated in this response, the issue was not one of the federal government's trying to control exactly what schoolkids may eat for lunch, but rather one of ensuring that all children covered under the Head Start program were provided with their allotted lunches at no cost to their parents. Last updated: 16 September 2014. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1442 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Killer Toilet Spider Warning Claim summaries: Was a man in Ireland killed by the bite of a deadly redback spider?
contextual information: Claim: A man in Ireland killed by the bite of a deadly redback spider. Example: [Collected on the Internet, August 2014] I saw an article in a news paper about the deadly redback spider being in the uk. It was headlined with "KILLER TOILET SPIDER WARNING: Dad dies from deadly redback bite" alot of people on Facebook are freaking out so I just wanted to see if it's true or false. Origins: In August 2014 social media networks were abuzz with reprinted versions of a typically sensationalized Sun article ("Yes, the deadly redback spider is ALREADY in Britain and could be LURKING under your toilet seat") about a 48-year-old man named John Francis Kennedy in Cork, Ireland, who reportedly was bitten on the neck by a "poisonous red-back" spider while watching a movie at home and died of "massive internal bleeding": Sun John Francis Kennedy, who went by the nickname 'JFK', suffered horrifying injuries as a result of the bite, and died last month from massive internal bleeding. His wife Jeanne insists that his death was the result of a spider bite he got last year and her description matches that of the deadly redback, which is one of the few spiders that can be seriously harmful to humans. Sometimes known as the 'toilet spider', redbacks can be commonly found living under toilet seats. The redback spider (Latrodectus hasseltii, also known as the red-striped spider, red-spot spider, and jockey spider) is a species of venomous spider indigenous to Australia, that typically lives in warm, sheltered locations, often in or around human dwellings. The redback is one of the few spider species whose bite does pose a significant risk to humans, as its venom can produce pain, muscle rigidity, vomiting, and sweating, and in some cases death: redback spider Perched in its tangled web, the redback spider lies in wait. She is a relative of the black widow; only the red dorsal stripe distinguishes them. Redbacks are found everywhere throughout the Australian continent, especially alongside human habitation. Only females build webs. Their smaller, less brilliantly colored male counterparts often lurk to the side. Humans must be careful. The spider won't seek out people to sting, but should a hand stray into her web by accident, a trip to the emergency room may be in order as the venom acts directly on the nerves. Only the female bite is dangerous, and their bites have caused some human deaths. The redback possesses a potent neurotoxic venom. It does not hunt its prey, but instead waits for a tasty morsel to wander by and become entangled in its web. Once the prey-usually a walking insect-becomes enmeshed in the redback's web, it's wrapped in silk. When it's time to eat, the spider bites down on its intended victim, injecting its neurotoxic venom. The venom paralyzes the insect, and digestive enzymes begin to dissolve the prey's insides. Antivenom for redback spider bites has been available since 1956, and no known deaths directly attributable to redback bites have been documented in more than fifty years since then, which makes this latest case in Ireland quite a subject of interest. However, note that the victim's wife, Jeanne, stated her husband didn't die soon after being bitten by a spider; he had actually been bitten a year earlier, and then he experienced a long period of declining health with various symptoms before finally passing away in July 2014: Antivenom She said: "He got bitten. We found a spider with a weird red back. "But the bite he got had bled very badly. We went through a roll and a half of toilet roll to try and stop it. "Ever since his health went down. "His stomach started swelling, they said it was his liver and his pancreas. "His testicles also swelled up very bad." Jeanne, 46, went on to describe how John's eyesight deteriorated and he started vomiting BLOOD. He eventually died in hospital last month and an inquest into his death has begun but Jeanne is already convinced it was the spider. "It had to be down to that sting. "He was in perfect health before the bite happened." So there's as yet no certainty that John Francis Kennedy was actually bitten by a redback spider, which had not previously been sighted in Ireland, other than someone's year-old recollection of what the spider in question looked like. And even if that species of spider did deliver a bite to the victim, it's unproven at this point that his death was directly attributable to that bite. He may have died from something else completely coincidental to that bite, he may have been suffering from an undiagnosed medical condition that had already compromised his health and was exacerbated or compounded by the bite's effects, or he may have suffered an allergic reaction to the bite (rather than being killed by the venom itself) a host of alternative explanations are possible. Until additional (and less tabloid-sensational) details are provided about this case, it's far too early to claim this as a verified example of a redback spider bite death in Ireland. And for those locals who fear that such critters are taking up residence in the area: Adam Faulkner, reptile keeper at Drayton Manor Zoo, said: "Redbacks would probably not be able to survive the British climate but they could survive if they found a warm house to live in." Currently there are no national records of redback spider sightings. Last updated: 25 August 2014 | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1443 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Lifetime Passes for Free Fast Food Claim summaries: Popular fast food outlets aren't giving away free lifetime passes to celebrate their anniversaries. Such offers are survey scams.
contextual information: In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook): As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information.Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1444 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 21st Century Wire says It s no secret that the US mainstream media enforces a very tight party line when it comes to saying anything about Israel. Generally speaking, any criticism of the Jewish State normally ends up in the editorial waste bin.The reason for this should be academic by now: powerful Israeli Lobby exists in Washington and with satellite branches across the US and Canada. The lobby s attack apparatus regularly coordinate media incursions and smear campaigns against any publication or journalist who dares to break rank and criticize Israel s appalling human rights record, endless violations of international law and flagrant ignorance of multiple UN resolutions. It consists mainly of the following organizations: the Anti-Defamation League (which devotes a large portion of its time and resources to defaming people it seeks to discredit), the quasi Masonic organization and godfather of the Jewish political attack organs B nai B rith International, and of course, the ADL s ugly step child, the dubious NGO Southern Poverty Law Center. These organizations enforce their strict public relations code through a collection of tactics like threats and boycotts, including targeting a publication s advertisers and sponsors, or featuring a journalist, media pundit, author or academic on one of their many Hate Lists , and by lobbing the standard charge of antisemitism against anyone who sounds remotely critical of Israel and its many failings.This week, David Cole, a national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, and Faiz Shakir national political director of the ACLU, penned a piece (see article below) in Jeff Bezos s recently acquired deep state propaganda mill, The Washington Post. In their impassioned piece, they posed the question of whether or not the recent US legislation called the Israel Anti-Boycott Act is moral in a modern democracy, or even legal for that matter. Incredibly, this new Pro-Israel law threatens fines and imprisonment to anyone who speaks of or campaigns to boycott, divest or sanction the Israeli state for its many and sundry documented international crimes. The level of tyranny inherent in this new piece of legislation is breathtaking to say the least. Simply put it s a direct attack on the US First Amendment. What s worse is that it s being orchestrated from outside of the United States by a foreign entity. The bill s target is the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, which is a global campaign that applies economic and political pressure on Israel to actually comply with international law (something the US government itself should also be doing). According to the authors, the new Orwellian law would also make it a crime to support or even furnish information about a boycott directed at Israel or its businesses called out by the United Nations, the European Union or any other international governmental organization. At its core, this law would constitute an anathema to any modern republican or democratic concept, and yet, this is what the Israeli Lobby seeks to impose on the people of the United States. So far, 45 US Senators have lined-up to support this bill, and not one member of Congress has joined the ACLU in denouncing it. On the Israeli payroll: US Senator Tom Cotton.Here s a fact that might be hard for some to swallow, but it s true: this law was only able to make it as far as it has because of the virtual stranglehold The Lobby has on nearly every member of the US House and Senate by way of lucrative campaign contributions to public officials by way of foreign lobbies like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and backed-up by public and media pressure campaigns which, for those who have dared to step off the reservation, have ruined many a career in Washington. This lop-sided situation not only threatens US democratic interests at home, but it s also a serious threat to US national security. What this also demonstrates is how easily US Senators will disregard the US Constitution for a few hundred thousand dollars stuffed into their campaign bank accounts by a foreign lobby. You can see their financials here and here.It s left many onlookers asking: what s going on at the Amazon Post? The article is certainly measured and very careful in its wording, but the fact that it was allowed to appear at all might indicate that the deep state is loosening its restrictions on speech on Israeli issues in the US mainstream media. We hope this is the trend anyway, although maybe not if the ADL, B nai B rith, and the SPLC have anything to say about it.By far, this is the biggest attempt yet by Israel at hijacking the US democratic system, albeit from within. If this bill passes, it will mark the near end of what remains of the sovereignty of the United States of America. That is no exaggeration.Here s the OpEd . By David Cole and Faiz ShakirThe right to boycott has a long history in the United States, from the American Revolution to Martin Luther King Jr. s Montgomery bus boycott to the campaign for divestment from businesses serving apartheid South Africa.Nowadays we celebrate those efforts. But precisely because boycotts are such a powerful form of expression, governments have long sought to interfere with them from King George III to the police in Alabama, and now to the U.S. Congress.The Israel Anti-Boycott Act, legislation introduced in the Senate by Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.) and in the House by Peter J. Roskam (R-Ill.), would make it a crime to support or even furnish information about a boycott directed at Israel or its businesses called by the United Nations, the European Union or any other international governmental organization. Violations would be punishable by civil and criminal penalties of up to $1 million and 20 years in prison. The American Civil Liberties Union, where we both work, takes no position for or against campaigns to boycott Israel or any other foreign country. But since our organization s founding in 1920, the ACLU has defended the right to collective action. This bill threatens that right.The Israel Anti-Boycott Act is designed to stifle efforts to protest Israel s settlement policies by boycotting businesses in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. The bill s particular target is the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, a global campaign that seeks to apply economic and political pressure on Israel to comply with international law.Whether one approves or disapproves of the BDS movement itself, people should have a right to make up their own minds about it. Americans engage in boycotts every day when they decide not to buy from companies whose practices they oppose. Students have boycotted companies that sold clothing manufactured in sweatshops abroad. Environmentalists have boycotted Nestl for its deforestation practices. By using their power in the marketplace, consumers can act collectively to express their political points of view. There is nothing illegal about such collective action; indeed, it is constitutionally protected.In NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., the Supreme Court in 1982 upheld the right of NAACP activists to hold a mass economic boycott of segregated businesses in Mississippi. The court stated that the boycotters exercise of their rights to speech, assembly, and petition . . . to change a social order that had consistently treated them as second-class citizens rested on the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values. This is not to say that all boycotters are automatically free speech heroes; indeed, BDS advocates have themselves at times shut down Israeli academics or speakers to the detriment of academic freedom. Thus, it s understandable that free speech advocates might not immediately identify BDS supporters as victims of censorship. But when government takes sides on a particular boycott and criminalizes those who engage in a boycott, it crosses a constitutional line.Cardin and other supporters argue that the Israel Anti-Boycott Act targets only commercial activity. In fact, the bill threatens severe penalties against any business or individual who does not purchase goods from Israeli companies operating in the occupied Palestinian territories and who makes it clear say by posting on Twitter or Facebook that their reason for doing so is to support a U.N.- or E.U.-called boycott. That kind of penalty does not target commercial trade; it targets free speech and political beliefs. Indeed, the bill would prohibit even the act of giving information to a U.N. body about boycott activity directed at Israel.The bill s chilling effect would be dramatic and that is no doubt its very purpose. But individuals, not the government, should have the right to decide whether to support boycotts against practices they oppose. Neither individuals nor businesses should have to fear million-dollar penalties, years in prison and felony convictions for expressing their opinions through collective action. As an organization, we take no sides on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But regardless of the politics, we have and always will take a strong stand when government threatens our freedoms of speech and association. The First Amendment demands no less.See the original article at the Washington PostREAD MORE ISRAEL NEW AT: 21st Century Wire Israel FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1445 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau broke some conflict of interest rules when he accepted a vacation last year on the Aga Khan s private island, the ethics watchdog said on Wednesday, the first time a prime minister has been found to have committed such a transgression. While the finding could tarnish Trudeau s popularity half-way into his mandate, he does not face any penalties. Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson said Trudeau contravened a rule on gifts when he accepted the use of the island in March and December 2016, while there were ongoing official dealings with the Aga Khan and the Aga Khan Foundation Canada was registered to lobby Trudeau s office. The vacations accepted by Mr. Trudeau or his family could reasonably be seen to have been given to influence Mr. Trudeau in his capacity as Prime Minister, Dawson said. While Trudeau says the Aga Khan is a family friend, Dawson found the exception for gifts from friends did not apply. Trudeau said he accepted her report and would clear future vacations with the watchdog. I take full responsibility for it. We need to make sure that the office of the prime minister is without reproach, Trudeau said. Trudeau and his family vacationed on the island during the holidays in late December 2016 into January this year. Members of his family visited in March 2016. Trudeau has come under fire from the opposition, who have said the luxury Bahamas vacation was inappropriate and showed the Liberal government is out of touch with average Canadians. The opposition has also accused Finance Minister Bill Morneau of being in a conflict of interest for not putting his assets in a blind trust. He has since said he will do so and has divested his stock in his family business. Trudeau says he has known the Aga Khan, Prince Shah Karim Al Husseini, since childhood. The Aga Khan, the title held by the leader of the Ismaili branch of Shi ite Islam, was a pallbearer at the funeral of Justin s father, former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Trudeau also contravened the rules when he and his family traveled in the Aga Khan s private helicopter last December and when his family traveled on a non-commercial aircraft chartered by the Aga Khan in March 2016, Dawson said. However, she found no evidence Trudeau discussed any parliamentary business with the Aga Khan or his representatives, or participated in any related debates or votes. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1446 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: TEHRAN — As Iranians woke on Saturday to the news that none of them would be able to enter the United States for at least 90 days, on the orders of President Trump, panic reigned. They were turned back from flights to the United States in Tehran and in the major transfer hubs of Istanbul and Dubai. Some of those who arrived in the United States after midnight, when the decree went into effect, were held or deported, rights groups and airline representatives said. No one, not passengers, airline representatives or even United States border control officials, seemed to know how to interpret the executive order that went into effect at midnight on Friday. Under the new policy, refugees, immigrants and almost anyone from seven countries deemed to be hotbeds of terrorism are banned from the United States for 90 days, pending a review of policies. Officials are just interpreting the directive by themselves, said one representative for an international airline who was based in Tehran. He said the airline did not know if Iranians could fly to the United States or not. On Saturday, three international airlines shuttling passengers between Iran and the United States — Emirates, Lufthansa and Qatar Airways — had stopped allowing Iranians with visas or even permanent residence cards to board their planes. The Qatar Airways office in Tehran confirmed that all Iranian passengers without United States passports were stopped from flying to the United States on Friday evening and sent back to Iran. In Istanbul, during a stopover on Saturday, passengers reported that security officers had entered a plane after everybody boarded and ordered a young Iranian woman and her family to leave the aircraft. Holders of green cards, which confer the right to live and work indefinitely in the United States, received conflicting information about whether or not they would be permitted to return to the United States. But on Saturday, the Department of Homeland Security clarified the executive order, saying it applied even to permanent residents from the seven countries named in the ban: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. “It will bar green card holders,†Gillian Christensen, the Department of Homeland Security’s acting spokeswoman, told Reuters. Many were blindsided by the decree while on vacation in Iran. “How do I get back home now?†said Daria Zeynalia, a green card holder who was visiting family in Iran. He had rented a house and leased a car and would be eligible for citizenship in November. “What about my job? If I can’t go back soon, I’ll lose everything,†he said. It is unclear how many Iranians have green cards, but experts say the number runs into the hundreds of thousands. In an online survey tracking entry challenges, two out of 112 passengers holding green cards said they were not allowed into the United States, but the reasons were unclear. Card holders can be barred, for instance, if they owe back taxes. Others spent years preparing to study in the United States only to see their plans abruptly thwarted on Friday. About 4, 000 Iranians are granted study visas to attend American universities each year, often after a long and complicated process that can take years. Shadi Heidarifar, a philosophy student just admitted to New York University, said in a message on Twitter that she had spent three years trying to apply to universities in the United States. “I had to work to save money, gather documents. The application fees were so expensive that a whole family could live for a month†on them, Ms. Heidarifar wrote. When she was accepted recently, she was over the moon. “But now my entire future is destroyed in one second. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1447 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Former Michigan Congressman and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Pete Hoekstra, spoke with Breitbart News Daily SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Wednesday regarding Sally Yates’ testimony before the Senate and the Comey firing by President Trump. [Said Hoekstra on Trump firing Comey, Democrats “are now in a very awkward position. They have a President that they don’t like who did exactly what they wish their president, President Obama, had done months ago and that is fire James Comey. And now it’s kind of like, well, what are we supposed to do now? How are we supposed to react to this?†Hoekstra continued to mock the Democrats, adding, “We don’t like anything that Donald Trump does. That’s our standard operating procedure and he’s now done exactly what we’ve been asking for for months. So, we have to now come up with a rationale why we don’t like this decision and why all of a sudden James Comey is our hero. †Hoekstra also said he felt Comey had become a distraction for the FBI and a liability to its reputation and the firing was appropriate. He also said Obama would have fired Comey before Hillary Clinton took office had she won in November, allowing her to pick her own director. Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a. m. to 9:00 a. m. Eastern. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1448 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: US Supreme Court justice groped female lawyer in 1999: Report US Supreme Court justice groped female lawyer in 1999: Report By 0 40
A female lawyer has accused US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of sexually assaulting her in 1999, a report says.
Moira Smith, who works as a corporate lawyer with an Alaska energy company, said the judge made unwanted sexual advances on her during a dinner party when she was 23-year-old, the National Law Journal reported on Thursday.
She said Thomas grabbed and squeezed her buttocks several times during the party in Falls Church, Virginia.
“Justice Thomas touched me inappropriately and without my consent,” Smith said.
“He groped me while I was setting the table, suggesting I should sit ‘right next to him,’” Smith said.
“He was 5 or 6 inches down and he got a good handful and he kept squeezing me and pulling me close to him,” she stated, according to the Journal .
In a statement to the National Law Journal , Thomas, 68, dismissed the allegation as “preposterous”, saying that the incident “never happened.”
Smith, currently vice… | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1449 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: No, Chick-fil-A Isn't Giving Away Free Meals on Facebook Messenger Claim summaries: Probably best to ignore any strange links offering free merchandise.
contextual information: In January 2020, bogus coupons circulated via Facebook Messenger, enticing users to click or share a link in order to redeem free meals from the fast-food restaurant chain Chick-fil-A.A representative from Chick-fil-A confirmed the coupons were fake. The hoax appeared to be a variant of a common scam that lured users into giving up personal information. As we previously reported on such scams: previously reported These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The coupon scam circulated around the same time outdated posts offering Chick-fil-A customers the chance to enter a raffle for free meals for one year recirculated on Facebook. Although those offers were real, they were no longer valid as of this writing. outdated The Better Business Bureau offers the following advice to avoid getting scammed: to avoid getting scammed | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1450 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Oliver North raised concerns about Osama bin Laden in 1987. Claim summaries: Did Oliver North warn Congress about Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings?
contextual information: For most of us who watched the televised Joint Hearings Before the Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and the House Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran (better known as the "Iran-Contra hearings," held by Congress to determine whether the Reagan administration had secretly and illegally sold arms to Iran in order to secure the release of American hostages, then used the profits from those sales to fund the contra rebels in Nicaragua) in 1987, the enduring image we came away with was a memory of an unapologetic and resolute Lt. Col. Oliver North delivering testimony in a Marine uniform. North, who was a central figure in the plan to secretly ship arms to Iran despite a U.S. trade and arms embargo, and who as a National Security Council aide directed efforts to raise private and foreign funds for the contras despite a Congressional prohibition on U.S. government agencies' providing military aid to the Nicaraguan rebels, testified before Congress under a grant of limited immunity in July 1987. Although North had been granted limited immunity for his testimony, he was later convicted of criminal charges related to Iran-Contra activities (a conviction that was eventually overturned on the grounds that witnesses had been influenced by his immunized testimony). One of the charges against North was that he had received a $16,000 home security system paid for out of the proceeds of the Iran-Contra affair and had forged documents to cover his receipt of an illegal gratuity. North admitted that he knew the security system was a "gift" but maintained he never inquired about who had paid for it or how it was financed, and he was insistent that he needed the security system because the government had failed to provide adequate protection against international terrorists for him and his family. The terrorist North mentioned in his testimony was not Osama bin Laden, however. To the extent that bin Laden was known to the western world in 1987, it was not as a "terrorist" but as one of the U.S.-backed "freedom fighters" participating in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's hatred of the U.S. and conversion to "terrorist" status is not believed to have come about until the Gulf War of 1990-91, when he was outspokenly critical of Saudi Arabian dependence upon the U.S. military and denounced U.S. support of a "corrupt, materialist, and irreligious" Saudi monarchy. (The Saudi Arabian government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship in 1994 for his funding of militant fundamentalist Islamic groups.) occupation Oliver North did not testify about or mention the name Osama bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings. He claimed that threats against his life had been made by terrorist Abu Nidal, telling a congressional committee: testify Abu Nidal Abu Nidal is, as I am sure you on the Intelligence Committee know, the principal, foremost assassin in the world today. He is a brutal murderer. And I would like to just, if I may, just read to you a little bit about Mr. Abu Nidal ... "Abu Nidal, the radical Palestinian guerrilla leader, linked to last Friday's attacks in Rome and Vienna" that was the so-called Christmas massacre in which 19 people died and 200 were wounded "is the world's most wanted terrorist." That is the Christian Science Monitor. When you look at his whole career, Abu Nidal makes the infamous terrorist Carlos [the Jackal] look like a Boy Scout. Abu Nidal himself, quoted in Der Spiegel, "Between America and us, there exists a war to the death. In the coming months and years, Americans will be thinking about us." "For sheer viciousness, Abu Nidal has few rivals in the underworld of terrorism." Newseek. Our own State Department, and we have copies of these that we can make available for insertion in the record, but the State Department summary on Abu Nidal, not exactly an overstatement, notes that his followers, who number an estimated 500, have killed as many as 181 persons, and wounded more than 200, in two years. Abu Nidal does not deny these things. We also have an exhibit that we can provide for you that shows what Abu Nidal did in the Christmas Massacres. One of the people killed in the Christmas Massacre and I do not wish to overdramatize this but the Abu Nidal terrorists in Rome who blasted the 11-year-old American Natasha Simpson to her knees, deliberately zeroed in and fired an extra burst at her head just in case. I want you to know that I'd be more than willing ... to meet Abu Nidal on equal terms anywhere in the world. There's an even deal for him. OK? But I am not willing to have my wife and my four children meet Abu Nidal or his organization on his terms. To emphasize his point, North showed the committee a blow-up of a newspaper article detailing the atrocities of Abu Nidal and recalled that an 11-year-old girl named Natasha Simpson, the daughter of an Associated Press news editor, had been gunned down (along with four other Americans) during an attack by an Abu Nidal group on the El Al terminal at the Rome airport in December 1985. North also later claimed that an attempt on his life had been made five months before his congressional testimony at the instigation of Libyan leader Mohmmar Qadaffi: Mohmmar Qadaffi In February 1987, Muammar Ghadaffi ordered his thugs to carry out a threat made against me in 1986. Thankfully, the FBI intercepted the well-armed perpetrators on the way to our home, and my family and I were sequestered for a time on a military base. The orders from Tripoli were delivered to a terrorist cell in Virginia at the offices of The People's Committee for Libyan Students. So no, Oliver North didn't warn us back in 1987 about Osama bin Laden's "potential threat to the security of the world" or suggest that bin Laden be hunted down by "an assassin team," nor was he given the brush-off by a clueless senator "who disagreed with this approach." Eventually, Col. North drafted his own response to this piece of misinformation: FROM THE DESK OF LTCOL OLIVER L. NORTH (USMC) RET.NOVEMBER 28, 2001OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS, I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL THOUSAND E-MAILS FROM EVERY STATE IN THE U.S. AND 13 FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN WHICH THE ORIGINATOR PURPORTS TO HAVE RECENTLY VIEWED A VIDEOTAPE OF MY SWORN TESTIMONY BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE IN 1987. A COPY OF ONE OF THOSE E-MAILS IS ATTACHED BELOW. AS YOU WILL NOTE, THE ORIGINATOR ATTRIBUTES TO ME CERTAIN STATEMENTS REGARDING USAMA BIN LADEN AND OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE SIMPLY INACCURATE. THOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO CLAIM THE GIFT OF PROPHESY, I DON'T HAVE IT. I DON'T KNOW WHO SAW WHAT VIDEO "AT UNC." (OR ANYWHERE ELSE) BUT, FOR THE RECORD, HERE'S WHAT I DO KNOW: 1. IT WAS THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL, JOHN NIELDS, NOT A SENATOR WHO WAS DOING THE QUESTIONING. 2. THE SECURITY SYSTEM, INSTALLED AT MY HOME, JUST BEFORE I MADE A VERY SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, COST, ACCORDING TO THE COMMITTEE, $16K, NOT $60K. 3. THE TERRORIST WHO THREATENED TO KILL ME IN 1986, JUST BEFORE THAT SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, WAS NOT USAMA BIN LADEN, IT WAS ABU NIDAL (WHO WORKS FOR THE LIBYANS NOT THE TALIBAN AND NOT IN AFGHANISTAN). 4. I NEVER SAID I WAS AFRAID OF ANYBODY. I DID SAY THAT I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET ABU NIDAL ON EQUAL TERMS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD BUT THAT I WAS UNWILLING TO HAVE HIM OR HIS OPERATIVES MEET MY WIFE AND CHILDREN ON HIS TERMS. 5. I DID SAY THAT THE TERRORISTS INTERCEPTED BY THE FBI ON THE WAY TO MY HOUSE IN FEB. 87 TO KILL MY WIFE, CHILDREN AND ME WERE LIBYANS, DISPATCHED FROM THE PEOPLE'S COMMITTEE FOR LIBYAN STUDENTS IN MCLEAN, VIRGINIA. 6. AND I DID SAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD MOVED MY FAMILY OUT OF OUR HOME TO A MILITARY BASE (CAMP LEJEUNE, NC) UNTIL THEY COULD DISPATCH MORE THAN 30 AGENTS TO PROTECT MY FAMILY FROM THOSE TERRORISTS (BECAUSE A LIBERAL FEDERAL JUDGE HAD ALLOWED THE LYBIAN ASSASSINS TO POST BOND AND THEY FLED). 7. AND, FYI: THOSE FEDERAL AGENTS REMAINED AT OUR HOME UNTIL I RETIRED FROM THE MARINES AND WAS NO LONGER A "GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL." BY THEN, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD SPENT MORE THAN $2M PROTECTING THE NORTH FAMILY. THE TERRORISTS SENT TO KILL US WERE NEVER RE-APPREHENDED. SEMPER FIDELIS,OLIVER L. NORTH Variations: One variant of this item concluded with the statement "The senator disagreed with this approach and that was all that was shown of the clip. If anyone is interested, the Senator turned out to be none other than ... Al Gore." Senator Al Gore of Tennessee was not a member of the United States Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and therefore did not take part in the questioning of any witnesses before the Committee. Additional information: Fisk, Robert. "Anti-Soviet Warrior Puts His Army on the Road to Peace."
The [London] Independent. 6 December 1993 (p. 10). Fritz, Sara and Karen Tumulty. "North's Attempt at Cover-Up Is Told."
Los Angeles Times. 24 June 1987 (p. A1). Ibrahim, Youssef. "Saudi Stripped of Citizenship for Funding Fundamentalists."
The [London] Guardian. 11 April 1994 (p. 8). North, Oliver. "Tackling Terrorism."
TownHall.com. 9 June 2000. Tackling Terrorism North, Oliver L.
Under Fire: An American Story. New York: HarperCollins, 1992 (pp. 341-344). Pincus, Walter. "North Says He and His Superiors Lied About Contra Aid."
The Washington Post. 9 July 1987 (p. A1). | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1451 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Every time a terrorist murders an innocent person, and falsely invokes the name of God, it should be an insult to every person of faith. Terrorists do not worship God. They worship death. President Donald J. TrumpDonald Trump insisted in a speech addressing global Islamic extremism that Muslim leaders must scare would-be terrorists into submission, warning them about the impact suicide bombings will have on their immortal souls. Religious leaders must make this absolutely clear: Barbarism will deliver you no glory piety to evil will bring you no dignity, Trump said in a sumptuous Saudi ballroom that put Mar-a-Lago to shame. If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and your soul will be fully condemned, he said. Heroes don t kill innocents, a confident Trump declared at the King Abdulaziz Conference Center in Riyadh. They save them. The president urged 55 world leaders from Arab and other Muslim nations to drive out terrorists from every corner of their lives including mosques in a zero-tolerance approach that lines up with his 2016 campaign rhetoric. Drive them out! he said. Drive them out of your places of worship, Drive them out of your communities. Drive them out of your holy lands, and drive them out of this earth, he trumpeted.Trump s performance was forceful at times but largely a cautious, measured and presidential-sounding effort, raising his voice only once. With God s help this summit will mark the beginning of the end for those who practice terror and spread its vile creed, the president said.Trump insisted that fighting terrorism is a battle between good and evil, not between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations. Terrorists do not worship God. They worship death, Trump declared. If we do not act against this organized terror, then we know what will happen and what will be the end result. He predicted that in the absence of multi-nation commitments to action, peaceful societies will be engulfed by violence, and the futures of many generations will be sadly squandered. And if the world doesn t unite to fight ISIS, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and other groups, he said, not only will we be judged by our people, not only will we be judged by history, we will be judged by God. Trump said Middle Eastern nations can t wait for the U.S. to solve the terror problem for them. Muslim-majority countries must take the lead in combating radicalization, he said.Trump took pains to isolate Iran in his speech, saying the Islamic republican is spreading destruction and chaos throughout the Middle East and gives terrorists safe harbor, financial backing and the social standing needed for recruitment. Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, too, declared on Sunday that the Iranian regime has been the spearhead of global terrorism. Trump called defeating global terrorism history s great test, as he urged summit attendees to vanquish the forces that terrorism brings with it every single time. Young Muslim boys and girls should be able to grow up free from fear, safe from violence and innocent from hatred, Trump said. This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life, and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it, Trump said, reading from teleprompters.Watch video here:King Salman seemed to agree with Trump s most aggressive and foreboding statement that jihadi terrorists place their souls at risk. Our way to achieve the goals of our religion and win everlasting life in heaven is to promote the tolerant values of Islam, which are based in peace and moderation, he said in introducing Trump from behind a desk onstage. There is no honor in committing murder, he said through a translator. Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance. it considers killing an innocent soul tantamount to killing all of humanity. Salman called on Gulf Cooperation Council leaders to reject extremism, work on fighting all forms of terrorism, stop its financing and its propagation, dry up its sources, and stand firm in confronting this scourge that poses a danger to all of humanity. And he pledged to prosecute terrorists and terror financing, to eradicate the ISIS terror army and other terrorist organizations regardless of their religious, sect or ideology. Daily Mail | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1452 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Corporations first Unfortunately, the poor factory worker in Haiti couldn t help Hillary or her campaign Hillary But just ask her, she ll tell you she s always looking out for the little guy! So much for the champion of the factory worker or the champion of the poor In Haiti, people work for peanuts. Slave wages. Less than $5 per day, but they supply the U.S. with tons of affordable clothing from big-name brands like Levi s, Hanes and Polo. Haiti s big advantage, compared to Asia, is their proximity to us, and thousands of Haitians are employed in the textile industry in part because of that. When Haiti passed a wage raise from $.24 per hour to $.61 per hour, American companies were predictably outraged.Enter Hillary s State Department Hillary Clinton colluded with big business to maintain slave wages for workers in one of the world s poorest countries, according to the host of an RT American comedy news show.Comedian and activist Lee Camp of RT s Redacted Tonight mocked Clinton s efforts to keep 37 cents per hour out of the hands of destitute Haitians. In 2009, while Bill Clinton was setting up one of the family s shell companies in New York, in that same year Hillary Clinton was at the State Department working with U.S. corporations to pressure Haiti not to raise the minimum wage to 61 cents an hour from 24 cents, Camp said April 17. Seriously. Memos from 2008 and 2009 obtained by Wikileaks strongly suggest, but don t prove without a doubt, that the State Department helped block the proposed minimum wage increase. The memos show that U.S. Embassy officials in Haiti clearly opposed the wage hike and met multiple times with factory owners who directly lobbied against it to the Haitian president.The Clinton campaign (as expected) refuted the claim, and the State Department didn t comment.- PolitifactThis took place in 2011, and Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State. Our corporations were successful, and Haitians continued to work for worse slave wages than they otherwise would have, all so U.S. corporations could take home higher profits.At the time, the U.S. Embassy said that the wage increase didn t take economic realities into account, and that it was a move designed specifically to appeal to the unemployed and underpaid masses of Haiti. Imagine that. Imagine trying to help your people have a better life instead of catering to huge corporations at your people s expense. The horror. News.groopspeakHOPE, not changeIn 2011, Wikileaks made nearly 2,000 cables available to the progressive magazine, The Nation, and Haiti Libert , a weekly newspaper in Port-au-Prince.The two media outlets assessed the cables and found, among many other revelations, that the U.S. Embassy in Haiti worked closely with factory owners contracted by Levi s, Hanes, and Fruit of the Loom to aggressively block a paltry minimum wage increase for workers in apparel factories.The Wikileaks cables show U.S. Embassy officials began monitoring the minimum wage issue as early as 2008, when the Haitian Parliament began discussing doubling or tripling the daily minimum wage of 70 Haitian gourdes to keep up with inflation. That s roughly equal to $1.75 a day, or about 22 cents per hour.(Some context here: Three quarters of Haitians live on less than $2 a day, according to the United Nations World Food Program, while garments constitute about 90 percent of Haiti s exports, according to the Guardian. Haiti increased the daily minimum wage to the equivalent of $5.11 in 2014.)But back in 2008 and 2009, embassy officials repeatedly told Washington that a hike would hurt the economy and undermine U.S. trade preference legislation known as HOPE.The program, shorthand for the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2006, gives garments manufactured on the island duty free access to U.S. markets. Levi Strauss, Haneswear, Nautica, and Dockers are just some of the American companies that benefit from HOPE. Congress passed HOPE II in 2008, extending the program for another 10 years.In January 2008, Ambassador Janet Sanderson wrote that representatives of the business community including the man tasked with implementing HOPE had met with embassy officials and criticized Haitian President Ren Pr val s efforts to raise the minimum wage as the wrong medicine for the ailing economy.An unsigned embassy cable sent to Washington in December 2008 echoed the private sector s assessment and reported that increasing the minimum wage would have significant impact on business.The State Department continued to promote HOPE as an economic boon for the island. In memos prepping U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and Clinton for their visits to Haiti, charg d affaires Thomas Tighe told the diplomats to urge the Haitian government take advantage of HOPE and HOPE II.For entire story: Politifact | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1453 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Are Cash for Clunkers Rewards Subject to Taxation? Claim summaries: Are incentive from the 'Cash for Clunkers' program taxable in some states?
contextual information: Claim: Incentives received by consumers through the "Cash for Clunkers" program are subject to taxes. Origins: People are often surprised to find that zero-cost items (e.g., prize winnings, free goods offered as marketing promotions, items given as gifts) may not require any immediate outlay of money, but they frequently do later in the form of taxes on the value of the goods and services received. One group recently caught by such a surprise was some consumers who took advantage of the federal government's CARS program (commonly known as "Cash for Clunkers"), which offered incentives of up to $4,500 to those who traded in qualifying "clunkers" and purchased new vehicles. Although incentives received through participation in the CARS program are not taxable at the federal level, residents of some states may have to pay some form of state and/or local taxes (such as excise or sales taxes) on the value of the incentives. Residents of Maryland, for example, find that each state determines whether to tax the clunker money. Pennsylvania does not, for instance, but Maryland applies its 6 percent excise tax to the incentive. "We treat that $4,500 as a down payment toward [the] car. We still tax the total value of the car," says Caryn Coyle, a spokeswoman with the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration, which collects the excise tax. Additionally, you cannot travel to Pennsylvania to buy your new car there to avoid the Maryland excise tax. States have agreements with one another to collect taxes owed on car purchases by residents in other states, Coyle explains. Therefore, a Pennsylvania dealer would have charged the Maryland excise tax anyway if the car had been bought there. If it's any consolation, there is no federal tax on the clunker incentive, and you may be able to deduct any state or local taxes paid on a new vehicle purchased this year from February 17 through December 31 on your federal tax return. In Nebraska, residents who take advantage of the government's Cash for Clunkers rebate might be surprised to learn that those rebates of $3,500 or $4,500 do not reduce the amount of sales tax a car buyer must pay. State Tax Commissioner Doug Ewald says he has received a number of complaints since the program started, but officials anticipated the issue and ensured that dealers were informed beforehand. Nebraska law treats the government's clunker rebates as a "third-party rebate," so they do not reduce the taxable value of the new car like a trade-in or manufacturer's rebate does. Thus, someone buying a $25,000 vehicle with the $4,500 clunker rebate would still have to pay taxes on the full $25,000. In South Dakota, many of those cashing in on the clunkers program are surprised when they reach the treasurer's office. This is because the government's rebate of up to $4,500 for every clunker is taxable. "They didn't realize that would be taxable. A lot of people don't realize that. So they're not happy and kind of surprised when they find that out," says Minnehaha County Treasurer Pam Nelson. In North Carolina, however, the CARS incentives are not subject to the state's highway use tax or its income tax. According to the North Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles, "the highway use tax should be calculated on the final sales price of the purchased vehicle less the amount allowed for the trade-in." For example, if you bought a car with a $20,000 price tag and the dealership gave you $3,000 for your trade-in, then you received the $4,500 Cash for Clunkers incentive, you would have paid $12,500 for the car. That is the amount you paid plus 3% as the standard Highway Use Tax. Hence, you are not paying taxes on the $4,500. The North Carolina Department of Revenue states that because the incentive is taken as a coupon at the dealership, you will not have to report it as income on your taxes. Consumers who took advantage of the CARS program should check with their state tax departments for information about whether such incentives are taxable in their home states. Last updated: 29 August 2009 Neisteadt, Shawn. "Some Surprised by 'Clunker' Tax." KELO-TV [Sioux Falls, SD]. 24 August 2009. Zash, Chelsi. "Can the Cash for Clunkers Incentive Be Taxed?" WFMY-TV [Greensboro, NC]. 24 August 2009. Associated Press. "Neb. Clunker Buyers Still Pay Full Sales Tax." Newsday. 21 August 2009. WJRH-TV [Tulsa, OK]. "Is Your Tax for Clunkers Taxable?" 21 August 2009. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1454 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Is Carrier owned by Donald Trump or does he own its stock? Claim summaries: After a high-profile negotiation with Carrier, rumors appeared that President-elect Trump owned a stake in (or all of) the company.
contextual information: A negotiation on 30 November 2016 between Donald Trump and the company Carrier aimed to keep approximately 1,000 jobs in the United States. This was soon followed by claims that he either owned or was a shareholder in the company or its parent, United Technologies. As part of its #TrumpLeaks program, the Democratic Coalition Against Trump uncovered the financial disclosures Trump filed in May 2016, which show he owns stock in UT. According to the 104-page financial disclosure form that all candidates running for President are required to complete, Trump made between $2,501 and $5,000 in interest from an investment in United Technologies. The entry in the financial disclosure can be found on page 45 under Part 6. The full financial disclosure is available online. The material quoted above cited the Democratic Coalition Against Trump, which claimed to be pursuing legal action against Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) head James Comey. That group was involved in several questionable efforts against Trump and appeared to exist solely to mount legal and media-based challenges against him. Claims that Trump owned Carrier or stock in United Technologies closely mirrored similar rumors that the President-elect was vested in the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. Although the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had at one point owned Carrier or United Technologies stock in 2014 or 2015, his 2016 Personal Financial Disclosure (PFD) did not reflect any such investment. Trump's spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, stated that there was a "goal of the immediate transfer of management of The Trump Organization and its portfolio of businesses to Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump, as well as a team of highly skilled executives." Trump's transition team vowed that any holdings representing potential conflicts of interest would be transferred before his January 2017 inauguration. In early December 2016, additional details about the Carrier deal emerged, including the total number of jobs preserved in the negotiation and a portion slated for outsourcing by the end of 2017. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1455 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: (CNN) This story was reported by Dana Bash, Gloria Borger, Abigail Crutchfield, Jeremy Diamond, Chris Frates, Noah Gray, Ashley Killough, Betsy Klein, Elizabeth Landers, Phil Mattingly, Dan Merica, Sara Murray, Mark Preston, Manu Raju, Gabe Ramirez, Maeve Reston, Lauren Selsky, Sunlen Serfaty, Cassie Spodak, Gregory Wallace, and Jeff Zeleny. There was more than a hint of irony in Donald Trump's win in New Hampshire Tuesday night.
In a state that has always been known for giving new political life to the hardest-working candidates, he swept the field. He lapped his closest challenger, Ohio Governor John Kasich, by double digits, and he notched his first win in this presidential contest by acting more like a traditional candidate.
Trump's victory speech was gracious and restrained with a long list of thank yous for family members and campaign staff. He acknowledged that he had learned the lesson in Iowa that the ground game matters, and paid more attention to turning out his voters in New Hampshire. Most striking, he had nothing but compliments for his fellow rivals.
In fact, Trump had been a mere spectator in the biggest brawl of the week -- the showdown between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio that recast the Republican race.
Entering New Hampshire after the Iowa caucuses last Monday, Rubio had been the candidate to beat, but Trump didn't even touch him. It was Christie who demolished Rubio, halting his momentum during Saturday night's debate in a moment that could go down in history as one of the toughest exchanges of the GOP primary campaign.
Though on the sidelines, Trump underscored the power of the moment during the commercial break as Christie walked across the stage to see his wife. Someone grabbed Christie's arm from behind, and the New Jersey governor turned to see none other than the taunter-in-chief Donald Trump.
"Oh my God. That was brutal," Trump muttered to Christie on the debate stage, according to someone familiar with the exchange. "Tremendous."
Perhaps staying out of the fray this week (with the exception of a vulgar swipe at Ted Cruz on the eve of the election) helped Donald Trump. He swept a range of demographic and ideological groups, appealing to six-in-ten New Hampshire voters who said they were looking for an outside candidate.
The commanding victories in New Hampshire by two outsiders — Trump and Democratic winner Bernie Sanders — reinforce the tremendous vulnerability of the establishment in the 2016 presidential race. Insiders in both parties are struggling to find their footing in a year when voters are fed up with the status quo. Democrat Hillary Clinton is looking toward the March contests as her firewall. John Kasich is trying to capitalize on his moment after climbing to second in New Hampshire. Jeb Bush is hoping to hang on by engineering a strong performance in South Carolina. Chris Christie has headed home to assess his chances amid indications that he will soon end his bid, according to two sources. And Marco Rubio is trying to regroup after a humiliating defeat.
Meanwhile, Trump only got stronger Tuesday night. After he underperformed in the polls in Iowa -- a fact many Iowa strategists attributed to the weakness of his ground game compared to that of winner Ted Cruz -- Trump's campaign made a concerted push to reach voters in New Hampshire who might not head to the polls.
In addition to his big rallies, he added smaller, more intimate events and retail stops where he could mingle with voters, apparently with great success.
"We are coming to the end of a beautiful, beautiful journey," he said during a town hall in Londonderry Monday afternoon. "It should be a very big day for the nation."
The dreamer takes on the doer
The outsiders understood that they had captured their moment: Sanders congratulated his supporters Tuesday night by promising "nothing short of a political revolution."
He vowed that his "movement" would bring together working people who have given up on the political process.
"We will all together say loudly and clearly that the government of our great nation belongs to all of us, not just a few wealthy campaign contributors," he told a boisterous crowd. "That is what this campaign is about. That is what the political revolution is about."
The momentum for a resounding win in the first-in-the-nation primary came a week earlier with his surprising strength in Iowa. Votes were still being counted in Iowa when Sanders boarded his charter plane to New Hampshire after midnight. The feat he had just achieved once seemed unthinkable: the 74-year-old democratic socialist from Vermont had come within a fraction of a percentage point of slaying Clinton, the anointed candidate of the Democratic establishment and one of the most famous women in the world.
Hours earlier, Clinton had dashed on stage to claim her somewhat tenuous victory before the networks even called it. But as Sanders and his aides winged their way to New Hampshire past midnight, they knew the narrative had shifted in their favor.
With that razor-thin margin, the world would view the result as a tie. That meant the Vermont Senator had cleared a huge hurdle: dispelling doubt that he could be viable. And that meant everything for the campaign's momentum in New Hampshire. The money was pouring in online.
"When we began this campaign, I think it is fair to say we were considered to be a fringe campaign. I would hope most people no longer believe that," Sanders told reporters as he stood in the aisle, illuminated by the ultra violet glow of the interior lights on his Eastern Airlines 757.
"We are in this to the convention," he said. "Tonight shows the American people that this is a campaign that can win."
Sleep could wait. By 5:15am that morning, he was standing on the back of a flatbed truck in Bow, New Hampshire, his breath visible in the cold New Hampshire air.
"Jane and I, we cannot believe that you're here at 5 o'clock in the morning," Sanders said, as he and his wife rallied supporters in the pre-dawn darkness. "Something is wrong with you guys!"
But the electricity surrounding him that morning was a harbinger of what would unfold in the week to come.
For Team Clinton, the imperative of closing a polling gap of more than twenty points a week before the New Hampshire primary seemed almost surreal. This, after all, was a state that had been kind to her and her husband. It was here that Bill Clinton positioned himself as the "comeback kid" in 1992. Her tearful moment at a Portsmouth coffee shop sharing her struggles with a group of women in 2008 allowed her to rebound after her humiliating third-place finish in Iowa.
Long before Sanders emerged as a threat this cycle, she had insisted she was taking nothing for granted, airing ads in New Hampshire as early as August. Clinton and her aides labored throughout last year to build the narrative that this was her historic moment.
At her first post-Iowa rally this past week with New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan, she was greeted here in the Granite State as the first woman to ever win the Iowa caucuses. Female senators flew up from Washington to canvass for her in hopes of breaking what she had called that highest, hardest glass ceiling.
But the overt appeal to the historic nature of her candidacy didn't seem to be resonating in 2016.
For weeks, tensions had been swirling within her camp about how to knock out the charismatic Vermont Senator, who had captured the same kind of cool that Barack Obama did in 2008. Some Clinton aides felt she'd been playing it too safe. Now behind by double digits, the stage seemed set for a long and protracted delegate fight.
Though New Hampshire seemed like a lost cause, she punched hard in Thursday night's debate, skewering Sanders' lofty proposals as fantasy that could never be achieved.
She bristled at Sanders' efforts to cast her as a creature of Wall Street: "It's time to end the very artful smear that you and your campaign have been carrying out," she told him. At the same time, she continued to stumble through answers about the $675,000 she was paid for three speeches from Goldman Sachs, which only seemed to reinforce Sanders' most powerful line of attack against her that she was the ultimate insider.
"Did you have to be paid $675,000," CNN's Anderson Cooper asked Clinton during CNN's Democratic town hall in New Hampshire a day earlier on Wednesday.
"Well, I don't know. Um, that's what they offered," she replied, seemingly caught off guard by the question. At the time she accepted those fees, she told Cooper, she wasn't sure she was going to run again for the White House.
"I didn't know to be honest, I wasn't -- I wasn't committed to running," she said.
Preparing for defeat, Clinton and her aides spent the week trying to lower expectations, with the candidate herself wondering aloud whether she should have skipped the Granite State primary altogether and moved on to firmer ground in Nevada and South Carolina, states with far more diverse populations where Sanders is not expected to run as strong.
Sanders had a home-court advantage in New Hampshire, she and her surrogates insisted over and over again, and there wasn't much she could do about it.
"Their argument is -- and it has got some strength to it -- look, you are behind here, you are in your opponent's backyard," Clinton told supporters at a campaign event in Derry mid-week. But ever the fighter, she vowed to press on: "I know I've got some ground to make up. I'm ready. I'm going to fight until the last vote is cast."
Behind the scenes, Clinton's aides were already looking at the map ahead: airing ads in South Carolina and Nevada to lock in minority voters who will be critical to their delegate counts and marshaling their teams in upcoming caucus states like Maine and Minnesota where Sanders thinks he can do well.
In a sign of resignation about Tuesday's likely result, they even sent Clinton out of state Sunday to Flint, Michigan, to talk about the water crisis -- an issue of great importance to many minority voters who have watched the scandal unfold in horror.
The most ominous development for Clinton: the yawning gap between her and Sanders among young voters, who broke heavily in Sanders' favor, according to exit polls Tuesday night.
Most strikingly, women under age 30 split 79% for Sanders to 20% for Clinton.
While many Clinton allies are deeply puzzled by gap, Clinton has tried to strike a positive note, stating at her campaign events, including Tuesday night, that even if young women were not with her, she will still fight for them.
Pressing her case, she also stressed that the struggle for women's equality is far from over. But she may have been harmed in the final days when others took that message too far. Madeleine Albright, the first female secretary of state, touched off a firestorm as she mocked Sanders' call for a "revolution" at Clinton's rally in Concord Saturday.
Introducing Clinton at that event -- which somewhat ominously was filled with out-of-state canvassers and some political tourists -- Albright said the real revolution in the 2016 race would be electing the first woman president.
"We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it's done," Albright said, before pivoting to a scorching rebuke of young women supporting Sanders: "It's not done. There's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other."
The crowd cheered and Clinton laughed, but the comments risked further alienating young women supporters of Sanders.
The controversy over Albright's comments was amplified by discussion of Gloria Steinem's observation earlier in the week in an interview with "Real Time" host Bill Maher that young women were supporting Sanders to meet "boys."
"They're going to get more activist as they get older," Steinem told Maher. "And when you're young, you're thinking, 'Where are the boys?' The boys are with Bernie."
Steinem sought to smooth over her comments in a Sunday Facebook post, but the sting of her words and Albright's remained. Some young women voters in New Hampshire said they were dismayed by what they viewed as shaming by the Clinton campaign and its allies.
Gabrielle Greaves, a University of New Hampshire student, who had attended the CNN town hall with both Sanders and Clinton earlier in the week, said the Albright and Steinem flap only reinforced the "disconnect between the generations."
"Older women just can't fathom why we aren't voting for Hillary Clinton, and I don't really think they're trying to understand," said Greaves, a 19-year-old Brooklyn native in an interview here in Manchester.
"I think a lot of older women think we don't understand how much Hillary Clinton has sacrificed, and how much she's been through and what she's done for women. Just because I don't think she should be president doesn't mean I'm not thankful for the things she has done."
Greaves added that "there's just something I don't trust about Hillary Clinton." Bernie Sanders, she said, "is a genuine soul."
"I just want the older generation to have the confidence in us that we can make decisions," she said. "Just because we have opposing views, doesn't mean we're not intelligent enough to think about these things and consider all the options."
The question of trust continued to dog Clinton throughout her events all week in New Hampshire. Interviews with voters after her rallies suggested she was having trouble closing the sale as some Democrats worried about her liabilities ahead.
Jane Fargo came to Clinton's Concord rally over the weekend holding a sign that said "Convince Me" in red letters. She left unconvinced by the former Secretary of State.
"I'm really torn. Who is going to look out best for my interests? My investments are going down; I'm looking at retirement in 12 years and it's really scary," said Fargo, a 52-year-old middle-school teacher from Bow. "I love Bernie's fiery spirit. Somebody's got to go shake up something and that sells me toward Bernie."
Standing next to the bleachers in the gymnasium where Clinton had just spoken, Fargo said she liked her ideas but worried about "how entrenched she is."
"She just been in government forever, so is she already sold out? Or is she really going to go in and shake things up like Bernie is promising to do?"
"I'm looking for change. I want change," Fargo said. At the same time, "when they say Clinton will be ready on day one, I've got a feeling she'll be ready on day one," she said. As for Sanders? "That's my qualm right there, you hit the nail on the head."
In the final days, Sanders' rallies crackled with the kind of electricity that accompanies a candidate on the rise.
Taking the stage in Portsmouth Sunday afternoon, he peeled off his jacket and tossed it to the beanie-clad college kids on the stage behind him -- who cheered as though they were in the presence of a rock star.
The cheers built to a crescendo as he ticked through the items in his stump speech -- railing against the "rigged economy," promising universal health care, vowing to take on the big banks and a broken criminal justice system. He engaged in call-answer exchange with the crowd as he encouraged them to shout out how much student debt they were carrying as he talked about his plans for free college.
"$100,000? ... You win," he said, pointing to one woman in the crowd.
To laughter, he mocked the refrain he has heard from Clinton's allies: "Your ideas are so ambitious."
Sanders paused for a beat. "We will get them done because people will demand that we get them done," he thundered.
Clinton's closing days of her New Hampshire campaign carried eerie echoes of her 2008 campaign.
Bill Clinton, who had been a subdued and measured advocate for his wife leading up to the Iowa caucuses, lashed out at Sanders supporters in the final weekend -- condemning sexist attacks and calling out the media for being too soft in their coverage of Sanders.
"When you're making a revolution, you can't be too careful about the facts," the former President said. "You're just for me or against me."
His critique of Sanders' agenda as unachievable recalled 2008, when he dubbed Barack Obama's campaign a "fairy tale." Once again, the former President warned, Democratic voters were rolling the dice.
By Monday, the die seemed cast. The conversation around the Democratic campaign focused not on a comeback, but on a campaign shakeup.
Looking to change the story line, Hillary Clinton was circumspect, saying in an MSNBC interview that the campaign was "taking stock."
On the trail, she struck a poignant tone in the final hours: "For me, this is a labor of love," she said at one of her last events at a restaurant on Manchester's West side.
She conceded defeat in a statement at 8 pm shortly after the polls closed in New Hampshire Tuesday night.
"I still love New Hampshire, and I always will," she said, taking the stage with her husband and daughter at Southern New Hampshire University.
But she was looking ahead to South Carolina and the states beyond, telling her donors in an email that she wouldn't be discouraged by the results.
"I wish tonight had gone differently," she wrote in a fundraising email. "But I know what it's like to be knocked down -- and I've learned from long experience that it's not whether you get knocked down that matters. It's about whether you get back up."
One political knock-down changed the trajectory of the GOP campaign in New Hampshire: Christie's merciless takedown of Rubio, who had seemed on the cusp of muscling the other establishment candidates out of the race for a three-way contest with Trump and Cruz.
Given Tuesday night's results with Kasich's strong second-place finish, Christie's maneuver to damage Rubio ultimately looked like a kamikaze mission for the governor, who staked his entire campaign on New Hampshire but ended up in sixth place.
A week earlier after Rubio's surprisingly strong third-place finish in Iowa, it had looked as though the establishment had finally found their candidate to rally around.
But with the skill of a New Jersey street fighter, Christie managed to single-handedly halt what Rubio's aides had dubbed "Marco-mentum" Saturday night by taking his rival's greatest strengths -- his youth, his charisma, his uplifting message -- and turning them into weaknesses.
Rattling Rubio with unflinching eye contact, Christie had walked the Florida senator into a trap: one that made him appear inexperienced, unready for the role of commander in chief, a robotic candidate programmed with scripted lines, who seemed to wilt under pressure as sweat beaded on his forehead.
"I like Marco Rubio, and he's a smart person and good guy, but he simply does not have the experience to be president of the United States," Christie said during that debate moment. "We've watched it happen, everybody, for the last seven years. The people of New Hampshire are smart. Do not make the same mistake again."
During the past month, the Christie-Rubio rivalry had turned intensely personal.
Rubio's allies had set their mark on Christie in early January just as he seemed to be rising in the polls on the strength of his many town halls here. Early that month, the super PAC supporting Rubio, Conservative Solutions PAC, unleashed multi-million dollar ad buy.
They put out a pair of scorching ads faulting the New Jersey Governor for his past position on Common Core, for his expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare, and for New Jersey's economic woes. One ad was essentially a montage of photos of Christie and Obama after Superstorm Sandy, a sore spot with conservative voters.
The other raised the specter of the George Washington Bridge scandal, the scheme to close lanes and create traffic tie ups that embroiled officials in his administration. "Chris Christie. High Taxes. Weak Economy. Scandals," the ad's tag line said. "Not what we need in the White House."
Christie and his allies were furious. In private conversations, Christie told aides he couldn't believe the response that Rubio was getting from voters and donors given his thin resume in Senate and what he viewed as a lackluster record of accomplishments, according to a person familiar with the conversations.
After Iowa, with their poll numbers still in single digits, Christie seized his moment to strike.
Some members of Christie's team became even more riled up by the calls they received after Iowa, suggesting Christie should drop out so the party could coalesce around Rubio.
As candidates began shifting their campaigns toward the Granite state on Feb. 2, Christie telegraphed his strategy to reporters, remarking that it was going to be an "interesting week" for Rubio.
He tested his lines about the dangers posed by first-term senators on the stump. And then the real onslaught began when he unleashed his new attack line for Rubio -- calling him the "boy in the bubble" who relied on advisers for canned lines.
Relishing his performance after the debate, Christie quoted "the great political philosopher Mike Tyson," the heavyweight-boxing champion.
"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face," he told reporters.
The debate moment was played again and again -- even on Tuesday morning as voters were headed to the polls.
People close to Rubio acknowledged that his performance in the debate clearly had an impact in the polls. But the headlines about how Rubio had choked were even more devastating.
On Tuesday night, he took full responsibility: "Our disappointment tonight is not on you," he told the crowd at his victory party. "It's on me. I did not do well on Saturday, and it will never happen again."
Allies of Bush and Kasich were virtually giddy, in large part because the debate had reset the race for donors who had been leaning toward Rubio.
Once again, these skittish donors were back on the sidelines -- frozen at least for a time. And it was clear that the fight for the establishment lane could continue for weeks to come.
In interviews on the campaign trail with New Hampshire's famously late deciders, many voters who had been enamored by Rubio admitted the debate had given them second thoughts. They echoed Christie's suggestion that Rubio might end up getting destroyed by Hillary Clinton in a general election.
Some were baffled by the fact that Rubio had repeated the same line four times in the debate and then repeated a line almost verbatim in one of his final events. What had once seemed like admirable message discipline from a polished candidate had turned into a viral meme. In the final days, Rubio was shadowed across the state by Rubio robots (paid for, of course, by the Right to Rise "super PAC" supporting Bush).
The doubts introduced late in the game mattered on Election Day.
Stephanie Tsepas, who ran into Rubio at her polling place in Derry Tuesday, had gone to see one of his town halls Friday and left with a headache, she said, because he seemed so robotic and rehearsed.
"I felt like I was living in one of his commercials," Tsepas said. She had a chance to engage at a more personal level with the Florida senator at her polling place, asking him about his plan to fund cures for cancer, a disease that her husband has.
Ultimately she cast her vote for someone else, though she would not say whom.
"He could be a great candidate for president," Tsepas said of Rubio. "I just don't think now is his time."
But as the results showed, the Christie-Rubio duel that dominated the final days of the first-in-the-nation primary cut both ways. After a disappointing finish, Christie headed home to review his options.
He may have taken a step too far in his effort to halt Rubio's momentum. Roger Fletcher, who had been considering the New Jersey Governor, decided he would side with the "victim, not the bully."
"Thanks to Chris Christie's bashing, I went with Marco Rubio," he wrote to Bash after casting his vote Tuesday.
The fight to break out of the pack
The Christie-Rubio showdown was a moment that had long been in the making in the crowded establishment lane here in New Hampshire. Four candidates — Rubio, Christie, Kasich and Bush — had labored in the shadow of Trump, and ultimately Kasich benefited most from that jumble in the middle of the pack.
From the beginning, those four candidates knew there would be another ticket, or perhaps two, out of New Hampshire beyond Ted Cruz and Trump. Though Cruz was not a natural fit for the New Hampshire voters, his ground game has proven exceptional so far and was able to ride his Iowa victory into more comfortable territory in South Carolina without facing high expectations here.
Casting about for more moderate New Hampshire voters, Bush, Kasich and Christie all committed early to the John McCain model, driving from one corner of the state to another, holding dozens of town halls and lingering until the last voters had a chance to shake hands and ask questions.
Behind the scenes it was a bloodbath of negative ads and mailers behind the scenes. By January, the candidates and their allies had spent at least $30 million on negative ads, according to Kantar Media/CMAG.
A large portion of that spending was by the pro-Bush super PAC, Right to Rise, which sought to cast Rubio as a vote-skipping political novice and Kasich as a budget buster who had agreed to expand Medicaid as part of Obamacare. One mailer from Right to Rise showed pictures of Kasich and Rubio on a pair of red dice: "Don't roll the dice. America needs a leader we can trust."
Despite all that spending, Bush flailed as he repeatedly tried to take on Trump without success. But he became a better campaigner during his time in New Hampshire. He kept his town halls wonky and policy-focused, insisting even during his final campaign stops here that he was still "a joyful warrior."
Voters would often walk away from his town halls marveling that the campaigner that they had just seen on stage was a different person than they'd seen in the debates. He became accustomed on the rope line to being counseled by voters, who tried to buck him up by offering unsolicited advice about how to improve his debate performances.
In the final weekend, his campaign ramped up its ground game, which had focused largely on the populous southern band of New Hampshire, by bringing in dozens of former aides to President George W. Bush and President George H.W. Bush, as well as friends from Florida to knock on doors and make phone calls. He drew one of his biggest crowds with a special appearance by 90-year-old Barbara Bush, who called her son "the world's nicest man" during an appearance Thursday night in Derry.
"He's not a bragger -- we don't allow that," Barbara Bush said that night. "But he's decent and honest. He's everything we need in a president."
Becoming more emboldened over time, Bush tried to cast his attempted takedowns of Trump as an act of valor, going so far as to call Trump a "whiner" and "a liar" in one of his final tweets the day before the primary.
"I'm defending the honor of people that I really respect," Bush told CNN's Dana Bash in an interview Monday. "I'm a joyful warrior. There's a difference between sitting back and watching someone try to hijack a party that I believe will allow people to rise up again."
Like Christie, Bush also became increasingly willing to go after Rubio in the final weeks. He offered his most pointed criticism of the Florida senator in an MSNBC interview Friday, shrugging when asked what Rubio had accomplished in the Senate: "Nothing," he said. "He's a great guy. But he's not a leader." And he refused to apologize for the attack ads by Right to Rise. "Politics ain't bean bag," he told reporters.
At his final rally in Portsmouth on Monday night, Bush reminded attendees that he'd gone to nearly every nook and cranny of New Hampshire, including about 15,000 different Dunkin' Donuts. His ground game was sophisticated and well-funded -- particularly after he had shifted resources and staff from his Miami headquarters to the Granite state.
"You're from New Hampshire, you can change the course of anything," Bush told voters in Portsmouth Monday night. "If you don't think the pundits are right, the obituaries that have been written about all the candidates, including me.... if you disagree with that you can reset this race tomorrow. You have that power. No one else does. It's an extraordinary responsibility."
In one of the ironies of Tuesday night's race, it was Kasich's sunny campaign that ultimately notched him a second place finish behind Trump.
Kasich's advisers had always believed that he had a strong chance here because of his moderate record and potential appeal to New Hampshire's undeclared voters. And they invested in data to help target those late-deciding independent voters in the final hours.
Throughout the process, Kasich had also chafed at what he viewed as unfair attacks on his record. After an event earlier this week, he complained to reporters that his campaign had millions of dollars spent against them.
"They can't even build mailboxes big enough to put all the negative advertising in from all these campaigns," he said. But he believed his ground game would "insulate us from all these attacks."
As Rubio stumbled, Kasich's strategists saw an opening, bringing in some 500 out-of-state volunteers to help them canvass and make phone calls in the final days.
He was one of the few candidates who looked like he was having fun on the campaign trail -- taking a break between his 99th and 100th town hall in Hollis, New Hampshire, Friday to engage in a snowball fight with reporters and aides.
"If we win, I think it will send a powerful message," Kasich said a day earlier, "because I think now is the time to be positive."
He touched on those themes in his victory speech after coming in second to Donald Trump, asserting that there was "magic in the air" and describing his campaign as an effort "to restore the spirit of America" while "leaving no person behind."
"Maybe we are turning a page on a dark part of American politics," he said, "because tonight the light overcame the darkness."
But the path ahead remains cloudy for the establishment: With a jumbled mess of candidates still vying for third late Tuesday night, the brutal battle in New Hampshire that was supposed to clarify the race ultimately may have simply led to stalemate. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1456 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Today is July 4th, otherwise known as America s Independence Day. Americans across the nation know this is the day our country came into being and we celebrate that by lighting fireworks and spending time with friends and family.But disgraced former Republican Rep. Allen West thinks something sinister is afoot.For years, conservatives have been trying to make everyone believe that there is an imaginary war on Christmas. Such an idea has been very profitable for guys like Mike Huckabee and the folks over at Fox News who constantly claim Christmas is being destroyed by godless liberals even though the war is only occurring in their heads.And now it sounds like West is trying to cash in on that concept by claiming that there is a war against July 4th.In his blog on Monday, West whines about how people simply refer to this day as July 4th instead of the 240th American Independence Day. I see something very disturbing happening today, he begins.We ve become so damaged by the talons of political correctness that it now threatens the very existence of our Republic. And I mean its very founding.I ve been amazed at how people greet you with Happy 4th of July , as if we are celebrating a numbered date on the calendar. If this continues, there will be generations who will no longer know what happened on this day, other than we should have cookouts and shoot off fireworks.Today is our 240th American Independence Day, a significant day not just for America, but for the world.Really? Just because people are greeting you today with Happy 4th of July that makes you convinced that Americans are forgetting what happened on this day? I see you still haven t had your head examined by a qualified neurologist, Mr. West. You might wanna get that checked.Anyway, West goes on to urge people to read the Declaration of Independence, which is a good learning exercise. However, West uses that call to then attack President Obama and liberals by comparing Obama to King George III and claiming that liberals are trying to subvert the holiday.These are the stories we must teach our children and grandchildren, lest they go off following the failed messages of the progressive socialist left. This is why we must not celebrate the 4th of July, but American Independence Day or else someone will tell you they re going to fundamentally transform your nation and you have no clue what that means.This is why today, I implore y all to take the time to carefully read the entire Declaration of Independence and notice the parallels to the grievances then to today, such as, He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their Substance think IRS and other regulatory agencies.Or how about this one, He has combined with others to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended legislation sound familiar? Consider Obama s rule by edict and executive order antithetical to our Constitution.And I love this one: For imposing taxes on us without our Consent need I remind you there are twenty new taxes in Obamacare.But just as West was wrong to torture a man in Iraq for information when he was a Lieutenant Colonel, he is woefully wrong now.First of all, President Obama was duly elected to his position by the American people. He is not a king and he his second term in office will be finished in January, and he will leave office. If he were a king, he would never leave.President Obama is not the only commander-in-chief to issue executive orders. Every single president except for one has issued an executive order, including George Washington. He issued 8 such orders. Thomas Jefferson, whom West brags about in his post, issued four. President Obama has issued 235 executive orders, but Reagan and George W. Bush issued over 600 combined. And if we look at the number of executive orders issued per year, we find that President Obama s average is the lowest in modern history. We have to go all the way back to Grover Cleveland to find a president with a lower average. If we go by West s logic, the only president who wasn t a tyrant was William Henry Harrison, who died one month after Inauguration Day. But even he would have likely issued some executive orders had he lived to complete a four year term.So executive orders have a precedence that goes back all the way to the first President of the United States.West also claims that the American people were taxed without their consent because of Obamacare. This is also an outright lie.By declaring our independence, Americans were able to create their own government and had the power to vote for their representatives in Congress. Americans did this very thing in 2008 when they sent a Democrat to the White House and kept Democrats in control of both chambers of Congress.The House voted in 2009 to pass Obamacare and all the taxes it contains by a vote of 219-212. The Senate voted to pass it by a vote of 60-39. And that was right after the people elected President Obama, and they would elect him again in 2012. West is likely whining because our system of checks and balances between the three branches of government, also established by the Constitution, has prevented Republicans from repealing Obamacare.It should also be pointed out that if President Obama were a tyrannical king, Allen West s head would be on a pike right now because that s what real tyrants do.It sounds like Allen West is the one who needs to brush up on his history.Featured image via Wikimedia | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1457 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: The three wealthiest people own more wealth than the bottom half of the American people.
contextual information: Do three Americans really have more wealth than half the country? Its a claim made by the runner-up for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president,Bernie Sanders. Campaigningon July 14, 2018 for U.S. Sen.Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., Sanderstold a crowdin Eau Claire: The three wealthiest people own more wealth than the bottom half of the American people. The U.S. senator, an independent from Vermont, previously made the claimon Facebookand repeated it three days after his Wisconsin appearance in a column inUSA Today. What we found is the wealth lead enjoyed by the three billionaires is even larger than what Sanders said. Like us on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter:@PolitiFactWisc. A study Before we dig in, an important note about the nations wealth gap: Many Americans make a good income, have some savings and investments, and own a nice home; they also have debt, for a mortgage, credit cards and other bills. The result is, even some people with relatively healthy incomes, as well as many poorer people, have a negative net worth. To back Sanders claim, his campaign pointed us to a November 2017news articlein Forbes. The business magazine reported ona studypublished that month by the Institute for Policy Studies, which the article described as a left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C. The study, which advocates for reducing wealth inequality, also gained news coverage fromUSA TodayandThe Guardian. And its authors wrote opinion articles about it forNewsweekand theLos Angeles Times. The numbers The study used data from Forbes 2017 ranking of the 400 richest Americans; and data for the rest of the country from the 2016 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances, which the study says has become widely accepted as the most comprehensive government dataset documenting household wealth. PolitiFact has alsoreliedonthisFed survey in our wealth fact checks. The first finding the study reported was this: The three wealthiest people in the United States now own more wealth than the entire bottom half of the American population combined, a total of 160 million people. Those individuals and their source of wealth are, according to the study: 1.Bill Gates, Microsoft: $89 billion 2. Jeff Bezos, Amazon: $81.5 billion 3.Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway: $78 billion Thats a total of $248.5 billion. The wealth of the bottom 160 million was $245 billion, the Institute for Policy Studies'Josh Hoxietold us. Thats a gap of $3.5 billion. Hoxie, a former a aide to Sanders, also pointed out that the wealth of the three billionaires has ballooned to $330 billion, according to Forbeslatest estimate. We dont have an updated estimate for the bottom 160 million American, as the Fed survey is done only once every three years. But Hoxie said its nearly impossible that the wealth of Americans at the bottom has grown nearly as much as that of the three billionaires. For the 160 million people at the bottom of the scale, by the way, the study used the net worth figure reported by the Fed and then subtracted automobiles and other durable goods such as electronics, furniture, and household appliances, from that figure. Subtracting durable goods from net worth offers us a more accurate depiction of household wealth as these items are not easily sellable and neither appreciate nor hold constant their value, the study says. Other viewpoints More fact checks on wealth inequality Michael Moore, in 2011: Just 400 Americans -- 400 -- have more wealth than half of all Americans combined.True. One Wisconsin Now, in 2013: The Walton family, which owns Wal-Mart, controls a fortune equal to the wealth of the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined.True. Starbucks, in 2015: White people control almost 90 percent of the nation's wealth.True. The studys methodology is sound and its conclusion cited by Sanders is accurate, according toAbdur Chowdhury, an emeritus economics professor at Marquette University in Milwaukee, and economics professorEmmanuel Saez, director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California, Berkeley. As an aside, well note that Saez also said Sanders claim is somewhat meaningless. The meaningful thing to say, Saez told us, is the bottom half of the U.S. families owns essentially no wealth on net, because debts cancel out whatever small assets they may have, on average. Our rating Sanders says: The three wealthiest people own more wealth than the bottom half of the American people. The wealth of Gates, Bezos and Buffett exceeded that of the 160 million at the bottom of the scale, according to a 2017 study. And more recent estimates indicate the wealth of the three has since grown dramatically, widening the gap even more. We rate Sanders statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1458 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: After it was announced that President Trump was seriously considering moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, he was roundly criticized by the anti-Trump media. Today, Democrats have announced they are drawing up the impeachment papers. Pope Francis appealed to President Trump to reconsider his decision so as not to offend anyone. In his appeal, Pope Francis said, Jerusalem is a unique city, sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims who venerate the holy places of their respective religions, and has a special vocation to peace. And yawn in Gaza, where the more things change, the more they stay the same, Palestinians burned the U.S. and Israeli flags.The media will try to make everyone believe that Palestinians loved us when Obama was President, even though there is no truth to that fantasy. (See image below)Daily Mail President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that America formally recognizes Jerusalem as Israel s capital city, changing decades of U.S. policy in a brief afternoon speech and casting the move as a bid to preserve, not derail, aspirations for regional peace.Appearing in the White House s Diplomatic Reception Room against an elaborate backdrop of Christmas decorations, He also said the United States embassy in Israel would, over time, be moved there from Tel Aviv.Israel is the only country where the United States has an embassy in a city that the host nation does not consider its capital. I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Trump said. While previous presidents have made this a major campaign promise, they failed to deliver. Today I am delivering. When I came into office I promised to look at the world s challenges with open eyes and very fresh thinking, he said, leaning heavily on a mid-1990s federal law that demanded the embassy s relocation. We have declined to acknowledge any Israeli capital at all, Trump added. But today we finally acknowledge the obvious, that Jerusalem is Israel s capital. This is nothing more or less than a recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do. It is something that has to be done. Matthew Continetti of the Washington Free Beacon seems to think so. Continetti wrote the best piece on Trump s bold decision to move the embassy that we have seen to date.Not only is President Trump s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and begin the process of moving the U.S. embassy there one of the boldest moves of his presidency. It is one of the boldest moves any U.S. president has made since the beginning of the Oslo peace process in 1993. That process collapsed at Camp David in 2000 when Yasir Arafat rejected President Clinton s offer of a Palestinian state. And the process has been moribund ever since, despite multiple attempts to restart it.That is why the warnings from Trump critics that his decision may wreck the peace process ring hollow. There is no peace process to wreck. The conflict is frozen. And the largest barriers to the resumption of negotiations are found not in U.S. or Israeli policy but in Palestinian autocracy, corruption, and incitement. Have the former Obama administration officials decrying Trump s announcement read a newspaper lately? From listening to them, you d think it would be all roses and ponies in the Middle East but for Trump. In fact, the region is engulfed in war, terrorism, poverty, and despotism; Israel faces threats in the north and south; its sworn enemy, Iran, is growing in influence and reach; and the delegitimization of the Jewish State proceeds apace in international organizations and on college campuses. I forget how the Obama administration advanced the cause of peace by pressuring Israel while rewarding the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Maybe someone will remind me.A similar form of doublethink is present in our discussions over Jerusalem. Every Israeli knows Jerusalem was, is, and will remain his capital. Every recent president has agreed with him. And the U.S. consensus has been bipartisan. The last four Democratic platforms have said the obvious: that Jerusalem is Israel s capital. The Senate voted 90-0 only six months ago urging the embassy be moved to the ancient city. Were we to take seriously neither these platforms nor that vote? Was it all virtue-signaling, a bunch of empty gestures in the kabuki theater of U.S. diplomacy?It is a sign of the disingenuousness of American foreign policy that it required someone from outside this system to behave as if words have meaning. President Trump has no background in or admiration for the routines, manners, and norms of the U.S. foreign service, especially that part of it which specializes in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This has enabled him to state unequivocally the fact others would prefer to avoid: Jerusalem is Israel s capital, full stop. His transactional nature also brought him to this fateful recognition. In March 2016, at the AIPAC policy conference, he pledged that We will move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem. His remarks today make clear his intention to fulfill that promise and to cement his support within the pro-Israel community.I wonder about the journalists and flacks and politicians criticizing this literal reading of U.S. law as disruptive. Have they not paid attention to this man? Donald Trump s purpose in office is to disrupt if not overturn the patterns of governance and ideological consensus that have dominated the U.S. capital for decades. In this sense, his Jerusalem policy is his presidency in microcosm. He is acting on a common sense appraisal of the world and satisfying the wishes of his supporters without regard to global or domestic elite opinion. What Trump knows more than the art of the deal is the art of the bluff and how to call one. By keeping his campaign promise today, he has called the bluff of everyone who thought the United States could have its cake and eat it too on the question of Israel s capital. And by moving our embassy to Jerusalem, the United States will acknowledge Israel s right to determine its own capital city. That is not something to condemn or fear. It is something to be proud of. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1459 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 13:29 UTC © The Free Thought Project Dramatic video from Intercept reporter, Jihan Hafiz , was released this week from the Dakota Access Pipeline protests showing a full on assault by militarized police on peaceful people. The video is from Saturday but took several days to be released as cops confiscated the camera used to film it. The video was taken as water protectors and reporters covering the protests marched toward the construction site. However, their peaceful walk was swiftly interrupted by militarized shock troops armed with massive cans of pepper spray, batons, rubber bullets, and assault rifles. According to Hafiz, the march was undertaken in solidarity with several protesters who had chained themselves to bulldozers and pipeline machinery at the construction site. But the marchers never made it to their destination. Instead, they were attacked by police forces who used pepper spray and beat protesters with batons. Dozens of officers, backed by military trucks, police vans, machine guns, and nonlethal weapons, violently approached the group without warning. "Don't move, everyone is under arrest," a voice says from the military vehicle that appears to be equipped with a Long Range Acoustic Hailing Device, or LRAD. As protesters attempted to leave, the police surrounded them and began their attack. According to Hafiz, several women were targeted for leading the march and dragged from the crowd to be arrested. Police body slammed one man and another woman's ankle was broken as she ran. The militarized police then circled the protesters in an apparent move to 'kettle' them — a tactic usually reserved for urban protests in which riot police force large crowds into corners to seemingly provoke them. However, the protesters stayed entirely peaceful. Police continued their mass arrests even though the people were trying to leave. Some natives were seen running for the hills as the assault began. One officer is seen in military camouflage with a ski mask and a tear gas grenade launcher — as if he were going to war . In total, reports Hafiz, more than 140 people were detained in half an hour. It was the largest roundup of protesters since the movement against the pipelines intensified two months ago. A majority of those arrested were charged with rioting and criminal trespass. Overall, close to 300 people have been arrested since protests against the pipeline kicked off over the summer. Among those arrested were journalists, a teen child who was also pregnant, and an elderly woman. They were all brought to the jail where protesters were forced to sit in the jail's common area as police had no other place to put them. According to Hafiz, women were strip searched, protesters were refused phone calls, and no one received food or water. One woman even had her medication confiscated by police, causing her to shake and sweat profusely. When Hafiz was finally released, she attempted to get back her camera and was told that she could not have it back. "Your camera is being held as evidence in a crime," they said. In the land of the free, filming cops assault peaceful men, women, and children is considered a 'crime.' Over the past several weeks, the police state has come out in full force as Native Americans fight to protect their water sources from the threat of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Mainstream media has remained largely silent as federal, state and local authorities worked on behalf of Energy Transfer Partners to squash dissent. Even prominent journalists, like Hafiz, have found themselves targets of the State, charged with dubious "crimes" such as " inciting a riot " and " conspiracy to theft of services " - for doing nothing more than filming protests and the ensuing violent crackdowns. As the video below shows, the First Amendment is no obstacle when it comes to advancing the interests of the corporatocracy. Comment: We are one breath away from an all out massacre! | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1460 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Democrats denounced it as an assault on democracy and a sop to billionaires when the Supreme Court issued a ruling two years ago that loosened limits on campaign giving. But Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party leaders are now exploiting the decision, funneling tens of millions of dollars from their wealthiest donors into a handful of presidential swing states. The flow of money, documented in Federal Election Commission reports, shows Democrats expanding their advantage in the final phase of the presidential race, defying expectations at the beginning of the campaign that Republicans would dominate the money chase. Mrs. Clinton and the Democrats are now outpacing Mr. Trump and the Republicans on every front, according to F. E. C. records: Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, her party and outside groups supporting her have raised almost twice as much as Mr. Trump and his allies. The influx of cash and the new rules have allowed the national Democratic Party to overcome a cash shortage and provide Democrats in key states like Virginia and North Carolina with money for early voting drives, additional staff and canvassing aimed up and down the ticket. The Democratic National Committee — in debt and underfinanced a year ago — has poured nearly $30 million into these key states through the beginning of September. The funding was powered by a surge of contributions raised by Mrs. Clinton from the likes of James Cameron, the Hollywood director, and George Soros, the retired hedge fund manager, as well as several members of the billionaire Pritzker family. The Republican National Committee has provided the states with just $11 million, limited by Donald J. Trump’s difficulties in persuading the traditional Republican base to invest in his campaign. “In many ways, we are kind of used to the concept of building our own empire,†said Matt Borges, the executive director of the Republican Party of Ohio, adding that he did not believe Ohio Republicans would be at a disadvantage come Election Day. “I’ll take whatever I can get. †More than of the Democrats’ cash went to a dozen presidential battlegrounds critical to any Clinton victory. The biggest beneficiaries were Florida, which has taken in close to $3. 5 million, and Pennsylvania and Ohio, which have each received more than $2 million. In each of those states, the funds from the national party have made a difference, erasing deficits in federal contributions against the respective Republican state parties. The money followed a legal but circuitous route turbocharged by the 2014 ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which struck down limits on the combined amount one person could donate to all federal candidates and parties in an election cycle. Like other candidates for federal office this year, Mrs. Clinton can accept only up to $5, 400 from any one donor over the course of her campaign. But after the McCutcheon decision, Mrs. Clinton established an agreement last year with the Democratic Party under which she asked her wealthiest patrons to write checks in excess of $300, 000, more than double the old limit, to the Hillary Victory Fund, an account made up of the national and state parties and the Clinton campaign. That amount is a lump sum equal to the total contributions each donor is allowed to give to her campaign and the Democratic National Committee, along with $10, 000 to each of the 38 state party organizations now participating in the arrangements. Because there are no limits on how much money party committees can transfer to one another, most of the state parties have cycled their share back to the Democratic National Committee. The party then moved the cash into a smaller number of battleground states to prepare for Election Day. The effect is a legal around contribution limits, allowing wealthy donors to give far more than $5, 400 to help Mrs. Clinton where she needs it the most. “If you’re a party leader or a candidate who can attract big enough donors, it means contribution limits are for the little guy,†said Ian Vandewalker, a counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, which favors tighter controls on political money. “The party leaders, the candidates who have a national name, significant amounts of their war chests are built from these big checks,†he said. The Democrats’ unexpected advantage comes courtesy of a lawsuit filed in 2012 by the Republican National Committee and Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama businessman. While both parties have used joint arrangements for years, the decision issued two years ago in the McCutcheon case made it easier to raise and concentrate even more money from the same small group of wealthy donors. At the time, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority rejected concerns that lifting the limit would make candidates more indebted to the biggest donors. During oral arguments, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dismissed the idea that party leaders or candidates in different states would cooperate by sending their contributions elsewhere as “wild hypotheticals. †Democrats also castigated the court, arguing that it had paved the way for the wealthiest donors to further dominate campaign giving. “With the rate the Supreme Court is going, there will only be three or four people in the whole country that have to finance our entire political system,†Mrs. Clinton said during an appearance in Oregon the week after the McCutcheon decision. Mrs. Clinton was no doubt exaggerating for effect. Still, the actual numbers are striking: Just 250 donors have accounted for about $44 million in contributions to the Hillary Victory Fund during the last year. Josh Schwerin, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said that Mrs. Clinton continued to support new restrictions on campaign money, but that the only way to achieve them was to elect more Democrats who shared her views. “Hillary Clinton has fought for campaign finance reform her entire career and, as president, will make it a priority to restore the role of everyday voters in elections,†Mr. Schwerin said, “but the stakes of this election are too high to unilaterally disarm. †By contrast, the money raised by Mr. Trump and the Republicans, while robust, has been driven chiefly by small checks from his supporters. And the Republicans have not been as shrewd at maximizing whatever money Mr. Trump’s have contributed. More of the Republican money is being directed into national party accounts that cannot be spent directly on the election. And the committee for Trump Victory — the collective account set up to receive big contributions for the state, national and Trump campaigns — had shared virtually no cash with the state parties through June. A Republican spokeswoman declined to explain why. Only one Republican state organization, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, had received any cash through August, according to Federal Election Commission records. The amount was $1, 050, to reimburse the party for tables and chairs. In an interview, Mr. McCutcheon said he did not mind that his lawsuit was paying more dividends for Democrats this year. “I think a lot of those Democrats were just publicly saying it was a bad idea, but a lot of them were on board,†he said. “I don’t care what party wins or loses as long as it’s a free speech system. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1461 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Has the net worth of U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell reportedly seen a growth of almost $2.4 million annually over a span of ten years? Claim summaries: A meme based on a 2014 campaign ad has continued to make the online rounds years later.
contextual information: In late February 2019, a misleading meme was circulated on Facebook that led viewers to ask whether U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky had mysteriously amassed vast wealth in yearly increments to the tune of $2.4 million while in office: As Senate Majority Leader, McConnell received an annual salary of $193,400, but the Kentucky Republican reported an influx of family wealth between $5 million and $25 million in 2008, according to his financial disclosures. That influx was the result of an inheritance his wife received upon the death of her mother, and that information has been part of public discourse since 2014, when it became campaign fodder for McConnell's Democratic opponent, Allison Lundergan Grimes: salary Although the meme and the campaign ad upon which it was likely based were set up to make it seem as if McConnell's wealth increase were the result of his role in the Senate and thus involved unethical or illegal activities, most of his net worth actually derives from his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, who hails from a wealthy business family and married McConnell in 1993. Chao is the daughter of James S.C. and Ruth Mulan Chu Chao. Her father is the founder of the New York-based international shipping and trading company Foremost Group, an organization her sister, Angela, chairs. How wealthy is the Chao family? Wealthy enough to have bestowed Harvard Business School with a $40 million gift in 2012. chairs gift According to the non-profit government transparency organization Center for Responsive Politics, McConnell's net worth jumped from an estimated $7.8 million in 2007 to $17 million in 2008, owing entirely to a tax-exempt, money market fund in an account he held jointly with his wife: 2008 As the Washington Post reported in 2014, McConnell's increase in wealth reflected inheritance mone Chao received when her mother passed away in 2007: reported Thats almost a sevenfold increase in 10 years. McConnell has quadrupled his net worth since 2007, when it was $7.8 million. So what happened in 2008? His financial disclosure form tells the storysuddenly there appeared a tax-exempt money market fund, valued at between $5 million and $25 million, listed as a gift from a filers relative. (Look at Line 2 and then Line 3.) Indeed, a McConnell spokesman confirms that this was an inheritance for McConnells wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, after her mother died in 2007. Chao, who married McConnell in 1993, earns significant income on her own, serving on corporate boards, and has at least $1 million in a Vanguard 500 Index Fund. (Since these shares are in her name, McConnell only needs to report they have a minimum value of $1 million.) The Center for Responsive Politics estimated McConnell's net worth in 2015, the most recent figure available, to be nearly $27 million. 2015 Kessler, Glenn. "How Did Mitch McConnells Net Worth Soar?"
The Washington Post. 22 May 2014. Newmyer, Tory. "The Secret to Mitch McConnell's Millions."
Fortune. 20 March 2014. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1462 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Let s face it, Obamacare had been a nightmare since it began. We have the website failure and then the corruption with the state set ups where millions went unaccounted for. Yes, we have the Gruber episode that should have buried the whole damn Obamacare debacle. So now we have a HUGE miscalculation on the part of the Congressional Budget Office this is big:What does the future of Obamacare hold now that its total cost is expected to be 11% higher between 2016 and 2025 than initially expected?There are mistakes, and then there are big mistakes. What the Congressional Budget Office s latest report on federal subsidies revealed was a mistake of monstrous proportions on the part of the federal government.Here s what a forecasting error looks like The Congressional Budget Office, or CBO, has been making projections on the future of Obamacare, and healthcare in general, for years. Initially, the CBO had projected that up to 21 million people would sign up for private health insurance using Obamacare s transparent marketplace exchanges by 2016. However, that estimate has been substantially reduced to just 12 million. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, Obamacare enrollment totaled about 12.7 million as of the end of third enrollment period (Jan. 31, 2016). Ultimately, the CBO foresees private health enrollment via Obamacare topping out at between 18 million and 19 million people between 2018 and 2026.Why such a huge difference in actual enrollment versus initial projections? To begin with, the government appears to have overestimated just how many people would sign up on private exchanges versus being enrolled via their employer. The data has thus far shown that nowhere near as many people as expected dropped out of employer-sponsored insurance to sign up on Obamacare s marketplace exchanges, meaning there was a considerably smaller uninsured pool than initially anticipated.The other possibility is that the shared responsibility payment (SRP) isn t working as initially expected. The SRP is a penalty charged to consumers who fail to purchase health insurance and who don t have a qualified exemption. The average SRP in the first year of Obamacare (2014) totaled $190, according to H&R Block, with the Kaiser Family Foundation predicting an average penalty of $661 for 2015 tax returns and $969 in 2016. Despite this increasing penalty, young adult enrollment is still well below initial expectations, most likely because the cost of the penalty is still much less than the annual cost of purchasing health insurance.By itself, this 9 million-person enrollment shortfall on Obamacare s exchanges is pretty substantial. Health-benefit providers had been licking their chops with the expectations of adding 20 million-plus enrollees within the first three years following implementation. However, that bubble has been popped, with only a few insurers truly benefiting.But this mistake is far from the worst.Now, here s what a monstrous forecasting boo-boo looks like As noted by the CBO report, the biggest boo-boo comes the federal governments estimate of how many people would enroll for Medicaid and Children s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).Initial estimates from back in 2010 pegged Medicaid and CHIP combined enrollment at about 52 million in 2016. The actual figures? How about 68 million current enrollees in 2016, or a difference of 16 million. The report notes that total Medicaid/CHIP enrollment grew by 3 million last year, and it s expected to swell to 74 million by 2026.How did the federal government miss so badly? The CBO believes that fewer people than expected enrolled in employer-sponsored plans because they were eligible for free healthcare under the expanded Medicaid program. Traditional Medicaid fully covers consumers making up to 100% of the federal poverty level. Obamacare s expanded Medicaid program, which 31 states and Washington, D.C., took advantage of, covers people earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level. The federal government appears to not have understood the magnitude of the lure to drop out of employer-sponsored care and be covered by Medicaid.What s even more egregious is that this estimate in 2010 was done before a Supreme Court decision in 2012 that allowed states the right to choose whether or not they wanted to expand their Medicaid program.When President Obama initially signed the Affordable Care Act into law in March 2010, Medicaid expansion was mandatory. However, a ruling of 7-to-2 by the Supreme Court allowed individual states to make the decision of whether or not to expand. Ultimately, 19 states have chosen not to. Their reasoning? The federal government offered financial assistance to all expanding states between 2014 and 2016 but fully plans to pare back its assistance to just 90% from 100% between 2017 and 2020. The holdout states simply felt that they would be left on the hook for too much additional revenue generation to cover these new Medicaid members. If Medicaid expansion was mandatory, the CBO estimates another 4 million people would be enrolled.This 16 million-person shortfall is far from insignificant. In fact, the CBO estimates that the federal government s failure to accurately forecast how many people would be enrolled in Medicaid/CHIP to be $146 billion over the next decade. When taking into account factors like the estimated $46 billion the federal government will save by paying out less than expected in subsidies for marketplace exchange enrollees, as well as the $28 billion less it s expected to collect in revenue because the Cadillac Tax will be suspended for an additional two years, Obamacare is now expected to cost $136 billion more than originally forecast over the long-term.Is Obamacare sustainable? It s anyone s guess at this point What does the future of Obamacare hold now that its total cost is expected to be 11% higher between 2016 and 2025 than initially expected? That s really anyone s guess, as major changes could be on the horizon like elect a Republican President who ll scrap the entire thing!Read more: fool.com | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1463 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Most Filipinos believe only the poor are killed in their country s war on drugs, and want President Rodrigo Duterte to reveal the identity of alleged narcotics kingpins and charge them in court, a survey released on Monday showed. The survey of 1,200 Filipinos by Social Weather Stations (SWS) conducted late in June also showed public opinion was split over the validity of police accounts of operations against illegal drugs that resulted in deaths. More than 3,800 people have been killed during Duterte s 15-month-old crackdown, all during police operations. Human rights group say the death toll is much higher and the official figures overlook murders attributed to shadowy vigilantes. Some activists say unknown gunmen have collaborated with police to kill drug dealers and users. Police and the government vehemently reject those allegations and accuse critics of exaggerating the death toll for political gain. The high death toll in Duterte s fight against crime and drugs, a key election plank, has stoked international alarm, although domestic polls have shown Filipinos are largely supportive of the tough measures. The crackdown has come under heavy scrutiny of late, prompted largely by the police killing of a 17-year-old student on August 16. Two witnesses on Monday told a senate inquiry they saw police officers kill another teenager arrested earlier in the same area for robbery. In both teen killings, however, police said the victims had violently resisted arrest. A third teenager arrested with the second victim was found dead with 30 stab wounds in a province about a three-hour drive away from the capital. Duterte has several times brandished what he called a file on 6,000 alleged druglords at the center of the country s trade. In the SWS survey, 74 percent of respondents said they wanted him to make that list public. The survey also showed 60 percent agreed with the statement that only poor drug pushers were killed. Duterte, who enjoys huge support among working class Filipinos, has been angered by critics who characterized his campaign as a war against the poor. The survey also showed nearly half of respondents were undecided whether police were telling the truth when saying that drugs war deaths happened only when suspects refused to go quietly. Twenty-eight percent said the police were lying but a quarter believed they were being honest. The Philippines, extremely sensitive about foreign criticism of its drugs war, last week accused the West of bias, hypocrisy and interference after 39 nations, most of them European, expressed concern about the drug-related killings. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1464 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: While many churches defend pastors who have raped or molested children in their congregations, a church in Pennsylvania is showing them what doing the right thing looks like.35-year-old youth pastor Wesley Ryan Blackburn is currently in jail waiting to be tried on 84 felony counts of statutory sexual assault, 84 misdemeanor counts of indecent assault and one felony count of corruption of minors, according to The Tribune-Democrat.Blackburn worked at Faith Brethren Bible Church in New Paris until last week when he admitted to his wife and state troopers that he impregnated a 15-year-old girl who was a member of the youth group he was teaching.The so-called man of God admitted his crimes to his wife after she confronted him about his misconduct. He then told her he didn t love her anymore and demanded a divorce.Blackburn s wife immediately called pastor James Espenshade and told him about her husband s misconduct with the teen girl.But unlike other churches that have stood by pastors who commit sex crimes, the Faith Brethren Bible Church did the right thing and straight up fired Blackburn and called the police. We didn t even care what he had to say, Espenshade told WAJC. We don t tolerate this kind of stuff it s inappropriate, it s reprehensible. There was never a discussion of anything else. We had to do what was right. Police questioned Blackburn while he was packing up his office and he was arrested and charged.The way this church handled Blackburn stands in sharp contrast to the way Columbia Road Baptist Church in North Olmsted, Ohio handled a similar situation.When youth pastor Brian Mitchell, a married man with three kids, was arrested and sentenced to ten years in prison for raping a teen girl, the church not only didn t fire him after discovering inappropriate texts he had been sending her, they continued to stand by him even after he went to prison by blaming the victim and demanding that she apologize to Mitchell s wife.Like Mitchell, Blackburn will probably receive a similar sentence. But Faith Brethren Bible Church deserves praise for calling the police upon learning of Blackburn s misconduct and for immediately terminating his employment. They also deserve praise for not blaming the teenage victim for Blackburn s actions. This is the way churches should handle these situations, but sadly, far too many of them do not.Featured image via Wikimedia | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1465 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Is Olive Garden headed towards closure? Claim summaries: An online ad promoting a list of restaurants closing in 2020 may have stopped breadstick-lovers in their tracks.
contextual information: In December 2020, an online advertisement displayed a picture of an Olive Garden Italian Restaurant sign along with text that read: "Closing Time: Here's All The Restaurant Chains Closing in 2020." This advertisement was misleading. Olive Garden is not closing all of its restaurants. Readers who clicked the advertisement were led to a 50-page story on the website Money Pop. 50-page story While the advertisement promised a list of restaurant chains that would be closing in 2020, the headline on the actual story was different: "These Popular Restaurant Chains Are Losing Money Fast." headline The story mentioned Olive Garden, but it only mentioned that two locations had closed in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Birmingham, Alabama, in March and April, respectively. Springfield, Massachusetts Birmingham, Alabama Olive Garden did not go out of business in 2020, but that's not to say it hadn't faced financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. The coronavirus had led to the closure of dine-in services at thousands of different restaurants across the United States. This meant less revenue, which resulted in lost jobs. In many cases, restaurants closed. lost jobs restaurants closed On June 22, 2020, Nation's Restaurant News reported that National Restaurant Association President and CEO Tom Ben said the restaurant industry had faced "catastrophic losses." reported Darden Restaurants owns the Olive Garden brand, as well as LongHorn Steakhouse, Cheddar's Scratch Kitchen, Yard House, The Capital Grille, Seasons 52, Bahama Breeze, and Eddie V's. On Dec. 9, 2020, InvestorPlace.com reported that Darden had managed to survive the pandemic thus far, but it also asked: "What's next for Darden Restaurants?" reported The bull case is built on a bear case regarding other restaurants. Without government help, small operators are closing by the score. This means chains like Darden may be all thats left when people again feel safe to eat out. Darden has managed to make money at Olive Garden while closing half its tables. It reinstated the dividend and paid back its $270 million emergency loan. Once the pandemic is over, Cramer predicts, fast-casual chains like Olive Garden will be the height of fine dining. the height of fine dining. Darden is expected to report earnings Dec. 18, for the quarter ending in November. The estimate is for 72 cents per share of net income on $1.7 billion of sales. That would beat last years profit on 17% less revenue. on $1.7 billion of sales on 17% less revenue The Money Pop story also mentioned The Cheesecake Factory on its list. We previously covered that rumor as well. previously covered Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1466 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Officially, history will record President-elect Donald Trump as having won the 2016 presidential race in Michigan by some 10,704 votes.But Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party s presidential candidate in the 2016 election, believes that the numbers would be different if all 4.8 million votes cast in the Wolverine State were recounted.That won t happen, Stein conceded in a rally in downtown Detroit on Saturday, a day after the non-recused members of the Michigan Supreme Court ruled, by a 3-2 margin, against Stein s appeal, leaving the candidate with no recourse. We may be moving out of the court of law, but we re moving into the court of public opinion, Stein said.The rally lasted about 40 minutes in freezing temperatures, and attracted dozens of the candidate s supporters. It took place near the foot of a street named ceremonially for Congressman John Conyers, Washington Boulevard. Bell, a Green Party member who helped supervise the vote-counting effort at Cobo, became emotional several times during her brief remarks, during which she called the election system in Michigan a flaming hot mess, a language Stein would herself adopt. Even if the results of the 2016 election won t change, and even if there won t be a full recount in Michigan, Stein said, the state needs election reform.Bell called out voting irregularities she d learned of, like how a polling place in Ionia County allegedly used a garbage can as a ballot box, or one in Gibraltar that sealed a ballot box with mere duct tape, or a precinct in Detroit that tabulated 300 votes but only 50 were found in the box. Hot mess! Hot mess! Bell said before handing the microphone to Stein. Count every vote, and make sure every vote counts, Stein said. This dysfunction in our elections flows downhill. It flows to communities that do not have resources The equipment that s used is prone to break. And it s not just the 87 scanners that failed in Detroit on Election Day. What raised a red flag in Michigan, Stein said, was the 75,000 ballots cast without also making a choice in the presidential race. MLive | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1467 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Tea Party radio host and Lieutenant Governor of Texas Dan Patrick has officially made the stupidest move yet in regards to bathroom rules in our schools. Patrick declared that Texas was prepared to forego literally billions of dollars in federal education funding rather than allow transgender children to use the bathroom. We will not be blackmailed by the president s 30 pieces of silver, Patrick ignorantly announced. The we he refers to are rich elected Republicans that can afford to send their kids to private schools. Not mentioned by any Republican is whether millions of Texas parents and children that are completely dependent on the public school system are also prepared to have their entire school system essentially shut down.This isn t just some minor budget readjustment and tightening of belts by teachers and school districts. This is totally defunding the educations of 5.2 million students who rely on federal money to attend an already desperately underfunded public school system in Texas.As of now, the issue of school bathroom use is inevitably headed towards our court system. The legal question is whether or not the federal government can continue using the Civil Rights Act to force schools to allow children to use the bathroom with which they feel comfortable.According to interpretation by the justice department, title 9 of the Civil Rights Act does allow for the federal government to prohibit discrimination based on gender in public schools that receive federal funding.If the courts find in favor of the federal government, which it is very likely they will, the president can then try to use the cutting off of federal funds in order to get state compliance on the law.The White House was asked about the Texas Lt. Governor s comments. Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, This does underscore the risk of electing a right-wing radio host to a statewide elected office. Truer words were never spoken.Featured image via Brietbart | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1468 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Rescuers are unlikely to find any more survivors of Mexico s earthquake still buried in the ruins and will cease operations to find them at the end of Thursday, the emergency services chief said. Tuesday marks one week since the 7.1 magnitude quake struck around lunchtime, killing 331 people, damaging 11,000 homes and leading to a outpouring of civilian volunteers to aid and comfort the victims. Luis Felipe Puente, coordinator of Mexico s Civil Protection agency, told Reuters that rescuers would continue hand-picking through the debris at four sites until Thursday. I can say that at this time it would be unlikely to find someone alive, Puente said, considering that specially trained dogs have yet to pick up the scent of survivors. Forty-three people were still missing, including 40 who may have been trapped beneath a collapsed office building in the Roma district of Mexico City, Puente said. One person was believed missing at each of three other sites in the capital. At the office building, relatives protested overnight, increasingly angry with the slow progress recovering their loved ones and an alleged lack of information. Asked how much longer search and rescue operations would continue, the official responded, As of today (Monday), we have agreed to another 72 hours. The week began with signs that Mexico was resuming its routine as the streets filled with traffic and more than 44,000 schools in six states reopened. But in the capital city, only 676 of the more than 8,000 public and private schools resumed classes. The quake, coming exactly 32 years after a 1985 earthquake killed some 10,000 people, delivered a massive psychological blow that specialists say will take time to overcome. The children are in crisis and don t want to talk. Some kids didn t even remember their own names, said Enriqueta Ortuno, 57, a psychotherapist who has been working with victims in the hard-hit Xochimilco district. Much of the nation s attention was focused on a fallen school in Mexico City where 19 children and seven adults died. Later on Tuesday, the top official in the municipality where the school was located was due to reveal documents related to the its construction. That school was one of many buildings that prosecutors will investigate, Puente said. Roughly 10 percent of damaged buildings were constructed after strict building codes were enacted in the wake of the 1985 earthquake. The Mexico City mayor and the national government have already ordered judicial investigations to determine who was responsible for new construction that did not meet the requirements, Puente said from Civil Protection headquarters, where a roomful of technicians monitored seismic activity and tropical storms on an array of screens. In Mexico City, 187 people died in 38 buildings that collapsed. Mayor Miguel Angel Mancera said thousands of families who lost their homes in uninhabitable buildings would be offered 3,000 ($170) pesos monthly in temporary rent assistance. Rescuers pulled 69 people from quake-damaged properties, of whom 37 were still in the hospital as of Monday, 11 of them in grave condition, Puente said. Demolitions of buildings that are beyond repair could begin as soon as Tuesday, he said. Responders from 18 countries came to Mexico to help, but with the search for survivors down to four sites most of them had gone home, with Americans and Israelis among the few to remain, Puente said. The Japanese contingent left on Monday. International aid was now focused on humanitarian needs, Puente said, with China providing large numbers of beds, tents and kitchen and bathroom fixtures for temporary shelters for the homeless. But the biggest contributions came from Mexicans themselves, who responded with so much food, supplies and volunteer work that officials had difficulty moving largesse from wealthy and accessible neighborhoods to the most needy. Puente recognized some deficiencies in coordinating relief efforts, but overall, he said, The government today is an international benchmark. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1469 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: During the pandemic, did Trump contribute to the U.S. economy by generating 11.6 million jobs? Claim summaries: U.S. Vice President Mike Pence made the claim during a debate with Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris.
contextual information: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to circulate. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Facing Democratic rival U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris for a debate in October 2020, Vice President Mike Pence attempted to credit his boss, President Donald Trump, for developing policies that helped rebound the economy after unprecedented losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, Pence stated that the U.S. workforce added millions of jobs since the early days of the outbreak because of Trump's fiscal and regulatory policies. He said, "We're going through a pandemic that lost 22 million jobs at the height; we've already added back 11.6 million jobs because we had a president who cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade. [...] We literally have spared no expense to help the American people and the American worker through this." In other words, he claimed the Trump administration spearheaded a variety of initiatives that added 11.6 million jobs in the summer and fall of 2020, regaining nearly half of the roughly 22 million jobs lost at the start of the pandemic. The comment echoed multiple statements by Trump in which he, too, attempted to praise the administration's successful balance of public health and economic interests. "Our strategy to kill the China virus has focused on protecting those at greatest risk while allowing younger and healthy Americans to safely return to work and school," he said in August. "We added 1.8 million new jobs in July, exceeding predictions for the third month in a row, and adding a total of over 9.3 million jobs since May." To determine the legitimacy of such assertions, we referred to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) "seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll," which is the standard measurement for determining how U.S. wage and salary jobs change over time. The payroll data are compiled monthly via a survey of about 145,000 businesses and government agencies across the country, excluding people who are self-employed or work for farms or private households. When a news story stated that, for instance, the economy added "661,000 new workers," that number typically referred to the month-to-month change in nonfarm payrolls—661,000 more jobs were added in September compared to August 2020. We obtained monthly nonfarm payroll data, which showed: According to our analysis of the month-by-month statistics, the economy tallied almost 1.4 million fewer jobs in March compared to February. Then, the recession deepened, and April recorded 20.8 million fewer jobs than the month prior—the steepest decline since the Great Depression. While Pence did not provide an explanation for his labor statistics at the debate, we assumed he was referencing the sum of job losses in March and April, showing employers cut about 22 million jobs during those two months, per the BLS data. After that, the country started a slow, steady recovery. The data show the following increases in job totals, all approximations, on a month-by-month basis: (We should note here that the monthly employment figures for August and September 2020 were both preliminary and subject to revision as of this writing.) Looking at the data, yes, about 11.4 million jobs were added to the U.S. economy between May and September, and the Trump administration's comments about the economy showing significant job growth since the early weeks of the pandemic were true at face value. However, that upward trend had little to do with the White House and everything to do with how businesses on a grand scale adapted to new rules on social distancing to curb the spread of the deadly virus. In March, for instance, California issued the first statewide "stay-at-home order," and New York City closed all non-essential businesses—both decisions that contributed to April's historic job loss. Then, over the weeks, employers developed plans for operating under public health officials' recommendations to curb the spread of COVID-19 and, as a result, were able to bring back workers who had been furloughed or reopen after a temporary shutdown. Those trends significantly impacted job growth in the U.S., not Trump. Additionally, a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan—which was developed by Congress, not the White House, via the March Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act—helped some small businesses bring back lost positions or keep workers who would otherwise have been laid off. That stimulus package's direct payments to Americans who earned $75,000 annually or less (or families that made up to $150,000 annually) may have also driven spending in the summer months and, consequently, kept some employers afloat after the initial shock to their profits earlier in the year. All of that said, no evidence showed that the Trump administration enacted policies—whether related to taxes or trade—that "added back" the jobs; rather, economic trends shifted from the early days of the outbreak during mass furloughs and business closures. Here's the bottom line: Presidential administrations often exaggerate their influence on the economy—especially when employment is showing somewhat positive signs—regardless of whether they're leading the country during a crisis like the COVID-19 outbreak or in comparatively normal times. As Neil Irwin wrote for The New York Times in January 2017, just days before Trump's inauguration: "The reality is that presidents have far less control over the economy than you might imagine. Presidential economic records are highly dependent on the dumb luck of where the nation is in the economic cycle. And the White House has no control over the demographic and technological forces that influence the economy." Additionally, the White House had little influence on how businesses quickly adapted to recommendations by public health officials to safely operate during the pandemic. For those reasons, we rate this claim a "Mixture" of truth and falsehoods. It was true that the country added back about half of the jobs lost during the early months of the pandemic, though it was a false misinterpretation of economic conditions to tie that job growth to Trump policies or to claim that he "cut taxes, rolled back regulation, unleashed American energy, and fought for free and fair trade," as Pence alleged, and that those moves directly added jobs. Here's video footage of Pence making the claim on the vice presidential debate stage, courtesy of C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4913299/user-clip-vp-pence-jobs-claim Factba.se. "Press Conference: Donald Trump Holds A Coronavirus Pandemic Briefing In Bedminster - August 7, 2020." Accessed 9 October 2020. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "BLS Data Viewer." 9 October 2020. Reuters staff. "Timeline: How the Global Coronavirus Pandemic Unfolded." Accessed 12 October 2020. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1470 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Can Israelis And Palestinians Change Their Minds?
What makes people change their minds? About the really hard stuff.
Covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the past three years, I've often wondered if people here ever do.
This conflict is frequently described as "intractable," with neither side willing to give up their historical perspective or their entrenched positions to end it. And it does not take many interviews to hear repetitions of the same sweeping narrative repeated on each side. Palestinians from different places cite the same historical events to back their views. Israelis who have never met each other use similar turns of phrase.
"People have a lot of [psychological] resources invested in what they believe about the conflict," says Thomas Zeitzoff, a political scientist at American University in Washington, D.C., who has researched Israeli and Palestinian attitudes.
He says the high political stakes and emotional involvement make it hard for Israelis and Palestinians to change their minds.
But there have been certain shifts – in public opinion and in individual beliefs - during the 68 years of Israel's existence and almost half-century of the Israeli military control over Palestinian territories.
Why? Experts list a range of influences that – to varying degrees – can move or even flip deeply held views.
"You can point to major events, either in the world or people's lives, changes in their social context, as well as changes in the kind of messages they get from politicians and other elite sources," says Brendan Nyhan, an assistant professor at Dartmouth College who researches politics and misperceptions.
Other factors include repeated exposure to a new idea, whatever the source, scientific research, and direct personal experience.
Four people – two Israeli and two Palestinian – told me their stories of personal, radical belief change related to the conflict. They not only changed their minds, but, a higher hurdle, their behavior.
Here are some triggers that led these people to see the world differently than they had before, even in the midst of a larger impasse.
Many groups supporting co-existence advocate for exposure to the other side. Knowledge develops empathy, they say, which can broaden an individual's perspective as well as pique curiosity.
Maayan Poleg is a Middle East program director for the group Seeds of Peace, which brings Palestinian and Israeli teens together for summer camp in Maine. She says the group does not advocate a particular political position and is not directly aiming to change minds.
But time together, deliberately discussing the conflict, humanizes the enemy, she says, and helps participants question their assumptions, as well as navigate the onslaught of opinions from politicians, family and media to clarify their individual beliefs.
"They become open to accepting the fact that what they know as truth is a narrative. That's a huge step," Poleg said. "People spend a lot of time defending a specific fact. And it takes them a long time to understand that their fact is actually a narrative. It doesn't mean that it's wrong. It just means that there's another way to view it."
Palestinians and Israelis used to interact with some regularity, often in the workplace or the marketplace. But over the past 15 years, they have been increasingly separated physically. They now spend very little time together.
But one Palestinian who went from throwing stones at Israeli soldiers to teaching non-violence says he began to change his mind about violence while in an Israeli prison. While behind bars, he learned Hebrew, saw his first movie about the Holocaust, and got to know Israeli prison guards.
"It's a process," says Bassam Aramin, who became one of the co-founders of Combatants for Peace, a group of former Israeli soldiers and Palestinian ex-militants. "You never wake up in the morning and say, 'Oh my God, we are wrong. The Israelis are right. I give up fighting.'"
He remembers the first time he and other ex-combatants – Israeli and Palestinian - sat down together. He was scared.
"We don't trust them. I think they're from the Israeli intelligence. Maybe they are coming to arrest us," Aramin recalls.
He saw fear in the eyes of the Israeli men who sat down with him.
"It's the first time they're coming to meet a Palestinian terrorist. And they have this fear of maybe one of us will kidnap them and kill them."
Trust did build trust over time and many conversations. They built an organization that teaches empathy and understanding.
But empathy is also vulnerable to a change of heart.
Many Israelis and Palestinians reached out to each other eagerly after leaders signed their first-ever peace plan back in 1993.
People were hopeful, and more open than ever to the idea they could live together peacefully, says Palestinian sociologist Nader Said.
"It was highly euphoric and highly exciting times," he remembers.
But that peace deal, the Oslo Accords, did not deliver on its promise. Violence returned with a vengeance when the second Palestinian uprising, or intifada, broke out in September 2000.
Said, who has polled Palestinians since the mid-1990s, says by then Palestinian support for co-existence had already begun to fall, as people grew disillusioned by the gap between expectations and reality.
"While they felt [Israeli] settlement activity would decline, settlement activity has increased," he says. "They felt maybe they'll have more access to Jerusalem, they have less access now."
Palestinian Abla Masrujeh is part of this societal shift. Now 54, she invested her time, money and reputation in joint projects with Israelis in the 1990s. She organized Israeli visits to her hometown of Nablus, in the West Bank, where they shared meals and visited Palestinian homes. She helped present a Tel Aviv exhibition of handcrafts done by women from both sides.
But when violence broke out once again, she felt her new Israeli friends did not understand her experiences as Israeli soldiers swept through the West Bank, or her point of view.
"All this made me rethink my position and my opinion of Israelis," Masrujeh says.
Israelis went through the same reversal of hope, says pollster Tamar Hermann.
"The repeated failures in achieving something tangible, and then the huge waves of terror, this made people think maybe it's not workable," she says. "People started to doubt whether the cognitive change which opened the door for the two-state solution was justifiable."
Many Israelis cite repeated suicide bombings, in cafes and on buses during the second intifada, from 2000 to 2005, as the beginning of a national shift in attitudes toward Palestinians.
American social psychologist Jay Van Bavel says accumulated experience often leads to change.
"Like a rat pressing a lever. If it gets a pellet, it will press the lever again. People are the same way," he says.
Over a decade, Israeli Tamar Asraf's mind and lifestyle turned 180 degrees around. She describes the process not as repetitive feedback, but as digging deeper.
Once secular and opposed to Israel's West Bank settlements as an obstacle to peace, Asraf is now religious and a spokesperson for Eli, a growing settlement in the central West Bank.
"It works like this. You get more connected to yourself, you get more connected to your private roots, then you get more connected to your national roots," Asraf says of her journey.
Exposed to religious Jews during her army service, Asraf began to feel her secular upbringing left huge gaps. When she began to study Judaism, her sense of connection to biblical places in the West Bank grew, trumping Palestinian claims to the same land.
Israel's political power base has shifted to the right over the past two decades, says Avi Dgani, an Israeli expert in mapping social and political dynamics.
But even though identity politics, magnified by frequent violence and international attention, play a large role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Dgani says big personal swings such as the one Asraf experienced aren't all that common.
That's because many people don't deeply question their personal beliefs, or, subsequently, their politics, Dgani says. He cites last year's re-election of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an example.
A third of Netanyahu backers chose him simply because "me and my father and my forefather, we always voted right," Dgani says.
Once people change their minds, one of the most powerful ways to maintain that new belief is to find new friends who share it.
Asraf moved to a settlement because the people there followed the same religious practices she had recently adopted. Once there, she started voting for right-wing leaders, as do most of her neighbors.
Another Israeli, Noam Chayut, shifted to the left politically. He says small jolts shook his beliefs briefly along the way, but real change took off when he found like-minded people.
Chayut wrote a book, The Girl Who Stole My Holocaust, about his change from Zionist soldier to co-founder of Breaking the Silence, an organization of former soldiers who share anonymous stories critical of Israel's military occupation of the West Bank.
Time and a great deal of reflection were key to Chayut's realization that his core beliefs had changed.
"Soldiers get orders, they obey," he says. "You just do things. But reflecting on it, I did things that were close to my moral boundary."
People can be pushed to change their minds when they sense a clash between their beliefs and actions has become too strong.
But change is hard because people protect themselves against internal dissonance, especially in situations as emotionally and politically laden as this conflict, says Thomas Zeitzoff, the American political scientist who has studied how narratives can change here.
"We think people engage in what psychologists would call 'motivated cognition,'" says Zeitzoff. "To avoid things that may threaten our own view of selves or others, maybe motivated in a benign way to remember certain facts more than others, and selectively ignore things that contradict beliefs."
And that's just one of the reasons it's so hard to change. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1471 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Posted on October 28, 2016 by Mac Slavo
This election remains more heated than any other in modern history – and for many, it has become a call to arms, even if only metaphorically.
Despite the fact that DNC operatives have been exposed as the ones inciting violence at rallies – Robert Creamer and Scott Foval for example – and working overtime to bus in illegal voters and rig the vote – the media is going out of its way to paint Trump supporters and grassroots Americans as the ones plotting violence.
Most recently, they are latching onto comments made by former congressman Joe Walsh, now a conservative radio host, who suggested he would ‘pick up a musket’ if Trump loses the election. On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump.
On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket.
You in?
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) October 26, 2016
Did Walsh mean to imply violence? That is certainly how the media is portraying it, as his comments spark controversy and fuel fire to the debate over the nearing election.
The irony that his commentary drew from the imagery of founding-era patriots who stood up to tyranny was deeply lost on the left, who see opponents to Hillary in black and white terms – racist, xenophobic, utterly deplorable and inherently violent.
CNN followed up, asking Walsh what he meant by statement.
via CNN :
Former Rep. Joe Walsh appeared to call for armed revolution Wednesday if Donald Trump is not elected president.
[…]
Walsh … did respond to CNN’s Jake Tapper via Twitter when he asked: “What exactly does that mean?”
“It means protesting. Participating in acts of civil disobedience. Doing what it takes to get our country back,” he responded to Tapper. @jaketapper It means protesting. Participating in acts of civil disobedience. Doing what it takes to get our country back.
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) October 26, 2016
After a firestorm on social media, Walsh doubled down, stating on Twitter: I'm serious. I don't think a musket would do much good these days, but it's time for civil disobedience on the right. https://t.co/ThJPEbALWZ
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) October 26, 2016
His heated rhetoric is a response to the endless episodes of fraud , dirty tricks and foul play by the Hillary campaign, as it seems that she will stop at nothing to become the first female POTUS – just the sort of abuse of power that the founders warned about.
1775-76 erupted in response to a long train of abuses – acts of oppression and hostility listed in the Declaration of Independence that is being largely repeated in modern day America.
Could Hillary’s reported election victory – or Donald Trump’s defeat – signal civil unrest and a new wave of resistance, particularly if the results are widely viewed as fraudulent or “rigged”? Trump, for one, has certainly been talking up the possibility of a stolen election.
The scenario is plausible enough that the Pentagon and Homeland Security have been carrying out secret drills in the lead up to the election to prepare for the possibility of a martial law response to violence or civil unrest.
As SHTF detailed in an exclusive report, a whistleblower has come forward on the ominous contingency plan to keep and/or restore order if the populace revolt against the establishment’s “selection” for president:
If there is any truth to it, the 2016 election could be a kick-off for total tyranny.
According to an unnamed source – who has provided accurate intel in the past – an unannounced military drill is scheduled to take place during a period leading up to the election and throughout the month after.
Date: October 30th – 30 days after the election Suspected Region: Northeast, specifically New York
1st Phase: NROL (No Rule of Law) – drill involving combat arms in metro areas (active and reserve). Source says active duty and reserve service members are being vaccinated as if they are being deployed in theatre.
2nd Phase: LROL (Limited Rule of Law) – Military/FEMA consolidating resources, controlling water supply, handing out to public as needed.
3rd Phase: AROL (Authoritarian Rule of Law) – Possible new acronym or term for “Martial Law”. Curfew, restricted movements, basically martial law scenario.
Source said exercise involves FEMA/DHS/Military
At this point, no one can say for certain what will happen in the aftermath of November 8, but it is clear that millions and millions of Americans are dissatisfied with the status quo, troubled about the economic realities perpetuated by the Fed and angry that Hillary may be put in the Oval Office rather than a jail cell, despite a trail of corruption with virtually no end.
How far will things go?
And will things ever be reset without a new American Revolution?
Courtesy of SHTFplan.com Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks. Share this: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1472 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Soros Paid Al Gore MILLIONS to Push ‘Aggressive US Action’ on Global Warming Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions o... Print Email http://humansarefree.com/2016/11/soros-paid-al-gore-millions-to-push.html Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars over three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming, according to leaked documents. A document published by DC Leaks shows Soros, a Hungarian-born liberal financier, wanted his nonprofit Open Society Institute (OSI) to do more to support global warming policies in the U.S. That included budgeting $10 million in annual support to Gore’s climate group over three years.“U.S. Programs Global Warming Grants U.S. Programs became engaged on the global warming issue about four years ago, at George Soros’s suggestion,” reads a leaked OSI memo.“There has been a budget of $11 million for global warming grants in the U.S. Programs budget for the last several years,” the memo reads. “This budget item captures George Soros’s commitment of $10 million per year for three years to Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, which conducts public education on the climate issue in pursuit of creating political space for aggressive U.S. action in line with what scientists say is necessary to put our nation on a path to reducing its outsize carbon dioxide emissions.”It’s unclear what year the memo was sent, but the Gore co-founded Alliance for Climate Protection (ACP) was established in 2006 and lasted until it became The Climate Reality Project in July 2011. In 2008, the Alliance launched a $300 million campaign to encourage “Americans to push for aggressive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions,” The Washington Post reported . Global Warming is NOT caused by humans: 10 Prominent Scientists Refuting 'Manmade Global Warming' with Solid Research ACP got $10 million from the Open Society Institute (OSI) in 2008, according to the nonprofit’s tax filings. OSI handed over another $5 million to ACP in 2009, according to tax filings. The investigative reporting group ProPublica keeps a database that has OSI tax returns from 2000 to 2013. TheDCNF could not find other years where OSI gave money to ACP.OSI is primarily a grant-making nonprofit that hands out millions of dollars every year to mostly left-wing causes. Now called the Open Society Foundations, Soros’s nonprofit has handed out more than $13 billion over the last three decades.OSI didn’t only plan to fund Gore’s climate group to promote global warming policies in the U.S., OSI also planned on giving millions of dollars to spur the “youth climate movement.” Greenpeace Founder: Humans Not to Blame for Global Warming “This budget item also allows for the renewal of U.S. Programs’ long-standing support of the Energy Action Coalition, which is the lead organizer of the youth climate movement in the U.S., the memo reads.“We are also including a placeholder for an additional $2 million, pending discussion about and development of OSI’s global warming agenda,” the memo reads. “There is a memo from Nancy Youman in the strategic plans binder that recommends pathways forward for OSI on the climate issue – in the U.S., as well as in other parts of the Open Society Network.” By Michael Bastasch | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1473 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The same guy who donated tens of millions of dollars to Obama s campaign (the first black president) is donation tens of millions to keep the black population in check via Planned Parenthood. How do these evil people sleep at night? Three weeks after I left my job at the clinic, Planned Parenthood took me to court. I am always asked, Why would they take you to court? Did they have something to hide? Well, yes. They absolutely had something to hide. They didn t want me sharing the information in this article. Let s expose the truth, shall we?Yes, I do realize that releasing this information puts me in a precarious situation. But it s always better for the truth to be out no matter the cost.It was life changing. I remember the first time we were able to make an appointment with our new funding it was called The Justice Fund. After we had given the woman all of the necessary information about her abortion appointment, we asked her if she wanted to apply for a funding program to help pay for her abortion. She of course said yes. We went through her income and expenses and determined she was eligible for funding. We informed her that she would only have to pay $100 of the $400 cost. The woman began to cry on the phone. So I began to cry. Wow. We were going to change so many lives with this money, this Justice Fund. When we were first told about The Justice Fund, we were told that the money had been given by an anonymous donor. Whoever this person was wanted to be kept totally anonymous. We, as clinic directors, weren t even given the information. The only people who knew were the board members of the National Abortion Federation (NAF). My boss happened to be on the board of NAF, and we were pretty close. Eventually, over some drinks at the annual NAF conference, she spilled the beans.For months, we had just known this person as the donor. At the annual Planned Parenthood conference, there was a woman there representing the donor. She never said her name to the crowd just said that she was so honored to be among all of us all of us who were protecting women s rights. She said that the donor was so proud to work with us. We knew that the donor was giving NAF up to $21 million dollars every year to help poor women pay for their abortions.Here s how the program worked. While scheduling a woman for an abortion, we would ask her if she would like financial assistance to help pay for her abortion. Um, of course they did. We would then go through a screening tool given to us by NAF. Pretty much everyone qualified and if they didn t we would rearrange the numbers so they did. Then, we would bill the amount owed to our clinic directly to NAF. They would then send the bill to the donor and then the donor would send our check to NAF. They would turn around and send the check to our clinic.During the first year of the Justice Fund, our abortion numbers grew by 100%. We literally doubled our abortion number. Abortion was much easier to sell when you didn t have the financial burden attached to it.About six months into the program, the rules changed. I guess we were billing too much, too fast. Now, the donor would only pay 40% of the cost, instead of 75%. That was fine. The women were still so grateful to have a huge chunk of money taken off of their bill. Now they were paying $240 for their $400 abortion. I remember our frequent flyers being angry when we told them that the rules of the program had changed. They wanted that 75% discount! Couldn t we make an exception for them since they had so many abortions at our clinic? Sometimes we would. Sometimes we would bill the donor for the entire amount. I mean, he didn t care. They weren t actually looking to see if we were implementing the program correctly. They just got the bill from us and sent the check. They knew we were trustworthy. Ha. Ha.So, my answer to why Planned Parenthood took me to court? Well, I think it was for two reasons.1). They wanted to make an example out of me. See workers, if you defect from us, you will find yourself in court, too. 2). Because I knew the ins and outs of the plan funded by the donor and, I knew his name. In 2003, there was a big scandal that broke out surrounding the company Pampered Chef. The majority of people selling this kitchenware were stay-at-home moms. Many of them were pro-life women. So imagine their surprise when they found out that the new owner of their company, Warren Buffett, had given millions to the abortion industry, primarily Planned Parenthood. Suddenly, there was a mass exodus from the company. Women were done selling their overpriced spatulas. You can see more about that story here.So, when Warren Buffett decided that he wanted to start this Justice Fund in order to donate $21 million a year to the abortion industry, you better believe that he wanted to remain anonymous. He tried to disguise the donations under the foundation started by him in the name of his wife, Susan Thompson Buffett. But the 990s are for public consumption. Anyone can see where they are spending their money. Here s the most up to date financials for his foundation. Click the year to view the 990 for that year.201120122013I encourage you to take the time to look through these 990s so you can see the organizations that he funds. He gave a boatload of money to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). It s no wonder they have so diligently fought legislation like banning partial-birth abortions. He gave 2 million dollars to the group called Catholics for Choice. Of course, they are not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church and in fact have essentially excommunicated themselves from the Church.Warren Buffett is single-handedly influencing many universities and medical institutions with his money. My advice is this. Read through the list. Find organizations to write letters to. Let them know that you will no longer be a supporter until they stop applying for grants to the Buffett Foundation. Maybe invite your friends over and have a letter-writing get-together. Send stacks of letters to these organizations. Make your voices heard! You may think that your small voice doesn t matter. But if your voice is paired with hundreds of other voices, these organizations will take notice.Paying for low income women to have abortions is all part of Buffett s population control campaign. After all, as Planned Parenthood s founder Margaret Sanger said, minorities are reckless breeders who should be eliminated from the human garden. The population control campaign is inherently racist as is the pro-choice position. I wish I had a dollar for every pro-choicer who told me that abortion has to be accessible for poor women as if being poor makes you an unfit mother.It seems that Warren Buffett and his beloved Planned Parenthood are two peas in a pod trying to eliminate the poor, one life at a time. Via: Life Site News | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1474 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: All of Donald Trump's achievements within a mere four-month timeframe? Claim summaries: We looked into the accuracy of a viral list touting President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office.
contextual information: In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump's accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: "Reddit TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS ..Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia." Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it's a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we've noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about "chaos" and "ineptitude" in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive. Thus, you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it's very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an "accomplishment." Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren't likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent - lowest since May 2007. As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on May 5, 2017, indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month, and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times' senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a "Trump effect" that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out. So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy, and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. This is a mostly accurate, partial list of corporations that have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). It's not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as "accomplishments" of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch's Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017, few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trump's America First policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months or even years in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the "second phase" of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM's $1 billion investment was "several years in the making," according to sources cited by CBS. The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank's pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted—a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S.—was the result of a tech fund the company announced on October 14, three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. You don't just decide overnight to invest $3 billion, said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. Bayer AG's commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump's negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn't already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016. Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer's remarks that the "combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States." That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it's likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. "Not an increase, but not substantially cutting," he said of the global figure. The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It's unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, the Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was "inflated" because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. It remains to be seen what effect Trump's policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on September 30). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office—positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by May 16, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump's alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. It's true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). As of May 17, 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). That's not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approved the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. Nor should it be assumed that Trump's signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska's National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 7, 2017. This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on January 23, 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama's fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already "bleak." The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 was indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. It's true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a "Trump accomplishment" or an "Obama accomplishment." As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren't officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. Although President Trump pledged to "strengthen" overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province, not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made "tremendous progress" but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated "pretty good" by The Wall Street Journal. Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the "unshakable alliance" between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a "currency manipulator" during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the "very, very good chemistry" Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia's attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, was strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be "extremely serious" consequences. British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the "special relationship" between the U.S. and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls "hard-line rhetoric" against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that country's increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as "macho posturing" that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump's gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. In April 2017, President Trump negotiated the release of U.S. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on March 13, 2017, directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all "unnecessary" agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their "efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability," the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. Regarding efforts to "reign in" the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that's been among Trump's top priorities from the start. President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency—a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change—and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order, and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump's commitment to cutting "burdensome regulations," while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on June 1, 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments. Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr. Trump singled out former President Barack Obama's egregious use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, "it's time we ended this abusive practice." As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an "accomplishment" (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one's political views going in. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD1475 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did George Washington Want Citizens Armed Against the Government? Claim summaries: Founding Father George Washington supposedly said that a free people need "sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence" from their own government.
contextual information: In January 2016, a quote attributed to first U.S. president George Washington, about the importance of an armed citizenry, started recirculating on the internet: This statement had been making the online rounds for several years, but it regained popularity in January 2016 after President Obama announced new measures on gun control. announced George Washington never uttered the phrase in question. The first ten words ("a free people ought not only be armed and disciplined") are taken from the former president's annual address to theSenate and House of Representatives on 8 January 1790, in which he argued in favor of an armed citizenry and self-sufficiency in production military supplies as a deterrent to war: annual address Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention that of providing for the common defense will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace. A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies. The proper establishment of the troops which may be deemed indispensable will be entitled to mature consideration. In the arrangements which may be made respecting it it will be of importance to conciliate the comfortable support of the officers and soldiers with a due regard to economy. A page dedicated to fake quotes attributed to George Washington on theMount Vernon web site addressed this passage as follows: addressed This quote is partially accurate as the beginning section is taken from Washington's First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union. However, the quote is then manipulated into a differing context and the remaining text is inaccurate. Although this meme does include a portion of Washington's first annual addressto members of theSenate and House of Representatives in1790, the majority of the quotewas never utteredby the Founding Father, and does not accurately represent his views on gun control. Nonetheless, its apocryphal nature doesn't hinder its continued reproduction as a genuine expression from George Washington: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1476 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Comments
Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) was the ranking minority member on the House Benghazi committee, so he knows firsthand how Republican witch-hunts work from up close personal experience.
On CNN’s New Day this morning, he revealed the real motivation behind the FBI Director’s stunningly improper memo to Congress last week.
“I don’t think the American people have a clue how hard the Republicans – particularly on my committee – have been on the FBI. This is a man – Director Comey – who they loved. They said he was the greatest thing in the world, very honorable.”
“When he came out with the decision in July to not prosecute Mrs. Clinton, they suddenly turned against him. He knows that if he makes any misstep, the Republicans are going to be all over him and they’re going to try and bring harm to him. The thing that he did say in our hearing, and it stuck with me, is that ‘there should not be a double standard to the disadvantage of Mrs. Clinton.'”
Cummings is heavily implying that the FBI Director was so intimidated by Congressional Republicans and the threat of being dragged in front of a Congressional investigation committee himself that he caved in and fed them the kind of vaguely worded red meat memo the Trump campaign desperately needed to keep their failing campaign on life support.
Even Comey himself admitted that his memo was going to be widely misinterpreted , which is probably why CNN’s host began her interview with Congressman Cummings by saying, “Trump is lying about the email probe.”
It hasn’t taken long for the roof to cave in on Comey’s career anyway, as his obvious meddling in the election has drawn bipartisan complaints about illegal electioneering by the FBI Director, his former boss to condemn his actions and for the Senate minority leader Harry Reid to demand answers from the FBI about the Republican candidate’s love affair with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. Reid’s point was not lost on the Congressman from Maryland who told CNN:
“There has been a lot of information out there about Mr. Trump, Mr. Manafort and the Russian government and alleged attempts to take over our election. Members of Congress have asked for months, for the FBI to provide us with information if Mr. Trump, Mr. Manafort and any elements of the Russian government have any coordination or connection with each other.”
“They have not given us one syllable. So the question here is: Do we have a double standard here?”
Of course there’s a double standard!
The FBI has a responsibility to keep certain things secret, and when it comes to partisan elections that responsibility is key to the ability of our electoral democracy’s basic functioning. Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald pointed out cogently that Republican George W. Bush was investigated by the FBI in 1996, prior to running for President. Yet, the Clinton White House didn’t grab his FBI file and air all of the dirty laundry claiming a very partisan need for transparency during an election. Otherwise, the FBI could decide to influence every election in America, and over time the FBI would pick the elected officials to their liking.
Nothing can un-ring the bell that FBI Director Comey struck by letting loose his vague memo, but everyone can understand there is a sexist, partisan and blatant double standard at play by Republicans celebrating a vague memo, which only happened because an official sworn to be non-partisan decided he valued his political career more than the integrity of our electoral system.
Watch it here: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1477 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Do Photos Show Children at Detention Center Under Trump's Watch? Claim summaries: Conditions at immigration detention facilities have been poor, to say the least, for years.
contextual information: In June 2019, a variety of news outlets published reports detailing the horrid conditions at immigrant detention centers along the United States' southern border. The Associated Press, for instance, quoted a lawyer named Warren Binford, who visited a facility in Texas and spoke to some of the immigrant children detained there, stating that the kids were living in "inhumane conditions." ABC News obtained a medical declaration that likened these detention centers to torture facilities. As outrage from these reports grew online, actress Nancy Lee Grahn posted a set of photographs that supposedly documented these conditions and accused the Trump administration of forcing children to "sleep on cement floors with an aluminum blanket & lights on all night." While the text of Grahn's tweet accurately reflects recent news reports, the photographs she used to illustrate her point were not taken during U.S. President Donald Trump's administration. These photographs are actually still images from a surveillance camera at a Border Patrol holding facility in Tucson, Ariz., in August 2015. The images were released as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Immigration Council and the American Civil Liberties Union against U.S. Customs and Border Protection concerning the conditions at the agency's temporary holding facilities. Here's an excerpt from an NPR report: The holding cells were designed to be used for temporary holding for a period of hours. The American Immigration Council analyzed Border Patrol data and concluded that from September 2014 to August 2015, two-thirds of immigrants detained in Border Patrol facilities in the Southwest were held for more than 24 hours, and tens of thousands of people were held for more than three days. Photos of the cells show people crowded together in concrete cells. Several images show prisoners sitting or sleeping on bare floors with no mats available to them, even when there are unused mats in empty cells. While these photographs were taken during the Obama administration, the conditions described in Grahn's tweet still apply to the detention facilities operating under Trump. Physician Dolly Lucio Sevier was granted access to a detention center after a flu outbreak sent five infants to the neonatal intensive care unit. In a medical declaration obtained by ABC News, Sevier compared the conditions to a "torture facility" and wrote that minors were dealing with "extreme cold temperatures, lights on 24 hours a day, no adequate access to medical care, basic sanitation, water, or adequate food." Binford, a law professor, told NPR: "They are worse than actual prison conditions. It is inhumane. It's nothing that I ever imagined seeing in the United States of America." The second part of Grahn's tweet mentions "Sarah Fabian" and claims that companies are making $750 a day to detain immigrant children. Fabian is a Department of Justice lawyer who attempted to defend the conditions at detention centers during a June 2019 Court of Appeals hearing. According to the Washington Post, the government went to federal court this week to argue that it shouldn't be required to give detained migrant children toothbrushes, soap, towels, showers, or even half a night's sleep inside Border Patrol detention facilities. The position bewildered a panel of three judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Tuesday, who questioned whether government lawyers sincerely believed they could describe the temporary detention facilities as safe and sanitary if children weren't provided adequate toiletries and sleeping conditions. One circuit judge said it struck him as inconceivable. The government was in court to appeal a 2017 ruling finding that child migrants and their parents were detained in dirty, crowded, bitingly cold conditions inside U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities along the southern border. Migrants are first taken to those facilities after they are apprehended at the border. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee had found that migrants in Rio Grande Valley facilities were hungry, with some eating only sandwiches of two pieces of dry bread and one slice of ham. They were thirsty, with up to 20 migrants sharing the same cup to drink from the water cooler. They were embarrassed to use a toilet in front of 50 other people, and they couldn't take a shower or brush their teeth or even wash their hands with soap and dry them with a towel, the judge found. At night, they couldn't sleep. The lights were left on as they shivered beneath an aluminum blanket on the concrete floor, the judge found. Gee ruled in June 2017 that these Obama-era conditions violated a 1997 settlement agreement requiring that immigrant children in the government's custody be housed in safe and sanitary conditions and that the government maintain concern for the particular vulnerability of minors. But the Trump administration protested. The 1997 consent decree, known as the Flores Settlement Agreement, didn't say anything about providing a toothbrush, towels, dry clothing, soap, or even sleep, the administration has argued. Grahn's claim that companies make $750 "a kid a day to torture them" relates to the fact that some immigration detention centers are owned and operated by private for-profit companies. Reuters reported in February 2019 that while it costs about $250 per day to hold a child at a permanent detention center, the cost can triple at temporary, privately owned, for-profit facilities such as the "Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children." As the government seeks to rapidly expand the site's capacity, it has waived a federal requirement at Homestead meant to ensure children receive sufficient health care. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which cares for the children, previously required Homestead to maintain a clinician-to-child ratio of 1 to 12 to provide mental health services, according to a November 2018 report. But that requirement has been relaxed to 1 to 20, a Homestead program director said on Wednesday. The facility sits on federal property, and unlike established children's shelters, such as smaller group or foster homes that hold migrant children across the country, it is not governed by state child welfare regulations designed to protect youngsters from harm. About 35 miles south of Miami, the facility is run by Comprehensive Health Services, Inc., a private, for-profit company with a growing line of business in housing immigrant children. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the firm's parent company, Caliburn International Corp., noted President Donald Trump's immigration policies were driving significant growth. It costs approximately $250 per day to house a migrant child at a standard, permanent shelter, said Mark Weber, an HHS spokesman. But at an influx facility like Homestead, the cost is triple that—around $750 per day. It is covered by American taxpayers. To sum up: Viral photographs supposedly documenting the conditions at immigration detention facilities under the Trump administration were actually taken in 2015 during Obama's tenure. The poor conditions at these Obama-era centers have continued or worsened under Trump. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1478 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Is there a plan by Biden and the Democrats to engage in surveillance of individuals' bank and Cash App accounts? Claim summaries: Social media posts mischaracterized how the American Rescue Plan will affect users of cash apps like Venmo.
contextual information: Various social media posts circulating in late December 2021 claimed that thanks to coronavirus stimulus legislation known as the American Rescue Plan, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and Democratic legislators would begin "spying" or "snooping" on users of cash apps like PayPal and Venmo. Here is an example of one such post: example The truth is, unsurprisingly, more nuanced, but the bottom line is that, contrary to what the above Twitter posts state, the effect of the legislation in question isn't that the Biden administration or Democrats will be "tapping into" or "spying on" bank or cash app accounts. This is a misleading characterization. What the legislation does is significantly lower the threshold for reporting taxable transactions made using cash apps like Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle for goods and services to the IRS. And when you reach that threshold, the app companies will then be required to send a tax form called a 1099-K to both you and the IRS. A 1099-K is, according to PayPal, an "informational tax form that is used to report goods and services payments received by a business or individual in the calendar year." PayPal As of this writing, the current threshold for such reporting is $20,000 and 200 payments in goods and services. Come Jan. 1, 2022, that reporting threshold will drop down to $600. threshold This could have a significant impact on platform users' tax returns. Here's how Bloomberg Tax described how users might experience the change: Bloomberg Tax For example, a model train collector may have paid $5,000 for model train pieces over several years that they now sell for $8,000, and the marketplace that introduced the seller to the buyer and through which the sale took place may charge the seller a total fee of $800. It may cost the model train seller $200 in postage to send the pieces to its buyers. The Form 1099-K that the seller will receive from the TPSO will report $8,000 in gross proceeds paid. However, the sellers taxable gain from that sale would only be $2,000. As a result, collectors and other online sellers will need to keep extensive records of their expenses going forward to avoid over-reporting of income and overpayment of tax. Also, consider the alternativea teenager who walks dogs to earn extra money. If their income in 2022 exceeds $600, their expenses may be limited to the fees charged by the website that connects them to pet owners, but they will owe income taxand possibly self-employment taxon the income they earn. According to PayPal, which owns Venmo, the change doesn't affect people who use the apps for personal transactions, like paying a friend back for your share of dinner, gifts, or chipping in for trips. PayPal also states that its app allows users to categorize their own transactions as personal versus rendering payment for "goods and services." PayPal Business Users on Cash Apps Will Begin Receiving Tax Forms. Heres What You Need to Know. WJHL | Tri-Cities News & Weather, 14 Oct. 2021, https://www.wjhl.com/news/business-users-on-cash-apps-to-begin-receiving-tax-forms-what-you-need-to-know/. Pflieger, Deborah. "New Form 1099 Reporting Coming in 2022," Bloomberg Tax, 15 Dec. 2021, https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/new-form-1099-reporting-coming-in-2022. New U.S. Tax Reporting Requirements: Your Questions Answered. PayPal Newsroom, 4 Nov. 2021, https://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/2021-11-04-New-US-Tax-Reporting-Requirements-Your-Questions-Answered. "PayPal and Venmo Taxes: What You Need to Know About P2P Platforms." TurboTax, 27 Nov. 2021, https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/self-employment-taxes/paypal-and-venmo-taxes-what-you-need-to-know-about-p2p-platforms/L5DNjOUM1. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1479 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: June 11 2004 Terrorist Rumor Claim summaries: Are terrorists planning to strike the U.S. on 11 June 2004?
contextual information: Claim: Terrorists are planning to strike the U.S. on 11 June 2004. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2004] PLEASE STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND READ THIS. WHO KNOWS WHETHER OR NOT IT IS TRUE, BUT IT IS NOT WORTH TESTING OUT. PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW. IT WILL TAKE FIVE MINUTES OF YOUR TIME AND HAS THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT PEOPLE'S LIVES FOREVER! THANKS!! Please read the below that was forwarded...it is pretty scary. gloria sent this to me...this was sent to her from a coworker at CNN...i'm not sending this to freak everybody out...but just try to be careful... Hi all I hope everyone is doing well. The reason I am sending out this mass email to everyone is because of something that was brought to my attention the other day that I feel I need to tell as many people aspossible in case it turns out to be true.. One of my colleagues has a good family friend who works in city hall. This friend called my coworker on Friday to tell him about some intelligence the city has gotten regarding a possible terror attack in the city (most likely the subways) planned for this Friday and urged him to avoid the subways if possible. He also told him something about the city placing an order for 2 to 3 thousand extra body bags. Now you have to take these things with a grain of salt because I am sure they get tons of this intelligence that turns out to be nothing. However there are some things that coinside with this Friday that seem to give it a higher probability than usual. The terrorists attacked the WTC on 9/11. They attacked Spain's subways on 3/11. This Friday just happens to be 6/11 (thank GOD I'll be on a plane that day!). Whether that means anything or not who knows. The thing that really has me concerned however is that all of a sudden a lot of things are now closed on Friday due to Reagan's death. The stock market, banks, Mail and all federal buildings are closed. Obviously Reagan's death wasn't planned but the fact they chose Friday as the day to do this big honoring of him strikes me as a little to coincidental (less people going to work = less people on the subway). The question that I get most when I tell people about this is why wouldn't they go on TV and warn people. Well I think the answer to that is simple....they can't. They would cause mass hysteria and the city would be out of control. Take this information and do with it what you want. I just felt the need to tell as many people as I could. God forbid something does happen this Friday and some people get hurt or die that I know and could have warned about it and didn't, well that would be a tough pill for me to swallow. I hope all this is bull and nothing happens this Friday or anyday for that matter. One thing is for certain though if I have to work on Friday I am taking a cab. Origins: There's an old joke I've heard used by many a person called upon to deliver yet another generic opening speech at yet another public function, and it goes like this: "I feel like Zsa Zsa Gabor's seventh husband on his wedding night I know what I'm supposed to do; I just don't know how to make it interesting." This is an occasion when I can understand the sentiment how can I write about the umpteenth variation of the same rumor and have anything interesting or informative to say, something that isn't a rehash of stuff I've written several times before? I'm not sure, so in this case I'm not going to try. I'll just reiterate the same points we've made elsewhere many times over the last three years: The "extra body bags have been ordered" claim is a detail that shows up in rumor after rumor about upcoming disasters (usually ones about which the government is supposedly keeping quiet because they "don't want to cause a panic"), as it's a simple yet effective way of creating a striking visual image of death in the minds of readers. (References to images such hospitals, ambulances, stretchers, and medics are similarly chilling, but they all allow for the possibility of survival, while a body bag signifies nothing other than the finality of death.) If a city government were really ramping up for a terrorist attack, there would be plenty of signs an insider might notice other than an order for "extra body bags": emergency personnel (police, firefighters, EMTs) being put on alert and scheduled for additional shifts, the implementation of extra security equipment and procedures, preparations to limit or close traffic to certain locations, stocking of emergency supplies (food, water, medical kits), maybe even requests to mobilize National Guard or federal troops. Why is it that the one and only tangible piece of information these anonymous informants ever seem to have is that someone is stocking up on body bags? Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, the government has warned us on several occasions about the heightened possibility of additional attacks, even when they had no specific information about when or where those attacks might occur. That they would say nothing to the public when they did have specific information about the date and location of a possible attack makes no sense, but (as always) anonymous rumormongers conveniently explain away that incongruity by maintaining the government is keeping mum because to do otherwise might cause "mass hysteria." Is there a better recipe for "mass hysteria" than allowing a foreseeable attack to proceed against a completely unprepared and unwarned populace? It serves no real purpose for terrorists to plan their attacks to fit into recognizable patterns. They might choose a date with symbolic importance (e.g., attacking the U.S. on the 4th of July would send a powerful symbolic message), but planning to strike on particular days simply because the dates make tidy numerical patterns is contrary to their purposes. They want to maximize their chances of success by attacking at times when their plans are least likely to be anticipated, and coordinating their strikes to fit easily recognized patterns is a pointless and poor way of accomplishing their goals. As noted, President Reagan's death on 5 June 2004 was obviously not a scheduled event, and declaring the day of his funeral (11 June) to be a federal holiday wouldn't stop people from being killed in the event of a terrorist attack. (The most common version of this message doesn't even identify a city by name some readers assume it refers to New York, others to Washington, D.C.) Sure, fewer people might be out and about on a federal holiday, but there are plenty of people who aren't employed by the federal government (or financial institutions) and would still have to go to work that day, not to mention all the people in the city who use public transportation even on their days off. Risking the deaths of, say, 20,000 people in order to avoid alarming 200,000 doesn't sound like much of a worthwhile trade-off. The New York Police Department has denied this rumor while (questionably) identifying it as a "part of a computer virus": denied THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS RECEIVED NO CREDIBLE THREAT INFORMATION CONCERNING A WIDELY-CIRCULATED EMAIL MESSAGE THAT DISCUSSES A PURPORTED SUBWAY ATTACK ALLEGEDLY PLANNED FOR FRIDAY, JUNE 11TH. IN ADDITION, THE EMAIL IS PART OF A COMPUTER VIRUS WHICH ATTACKS THE ADDRESS BOOKS OF ITS RECIPIENTS AND SPREADS BY USING THOSE ADDRESSES. COMPUTER USERS ARE REMINDED NOT TO OPEN MESSAGES OF FROM SUSPECT OR UNFAMILIAR SENDERS. (It's possible this message has been re-sent by some recipients whose PCs were already infected by viruses, but we haven't seen any evidence that the message itself was deliberately circulated as a way of spreading malevolent code.) June 11 came and went without incident; no terrorist attacks took place, and there was no news of any having been thwarted. The essence of this message was the same as countless other similar rumors we've traced since September 11: the world is a scary place, especially when you're dealing with hidden foes who might strike anywhere, at any time. Asserting that the enemy will follow a predictable pattern allows us to regain a sense of direction, to feel that we have control of our futures, to believe that we can take active steps to avoid becoming victims rather than passively awaiting our fates. What we fear most is the unknown, and these types of rumors provide us with the comfort of knowing something, even if that something proves to be bogus. Whether this sort of comfort is worth the price of the false fears that usually accompany it is up to the individual to decide. Last updated: 14 March 2008 Sources: Reuters. "New York Police Say E-Mail on Subway Attack Is Hoax." 9 June 2004. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1480 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Soon after newly elected Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez announced she would be scaling back her department s cooperation with federal immigration agents, Gov. Greg Abbott tweeted that his office will cut funding for Travis County adopting sanctuary policies. The Governor's Office will cut funding for Travis County adopting sanctuary policies. Stiffer penalties coming. https://t.co/yYxeXql3xL Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) January 20, 2017 Stiffer penalties coming, his tweet says.This week, the American-Statesman reported that she had notified the county that it would soon no longer be complying with federal agents requests in many cases. The county consequently could lose up to $1.8 million in grants because the governor s office requires compliance in order to receive grants.Gov. Greg Abbott said via Twitter in response to the Statesman s report, I m about to up the ante. No more sanctuary cities in Texas. Texas Governor Greg Abbott warned he would cut off aid to Sheriff Hernandez if she refused to cooperate with the Federal immigration agencies:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=DXPmp2XIizk&pbjreload=10The Travis County sheriff s office has a $169 million budget, according to the county s budget website. The $1.8 million would represent 1 percent of that budget.Earlier: In a major policy shift that is already being met with controversy, Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez on Friday announced that she is scaling back the amount of aid her department provides federal immigration agents in detaining suspects who may be in the country illegally.Traditionally, the county has honored nearly all requests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold a suspect booked into jail when agents have wanted to investigate their status further. However, effective Feb. 1, sheriff s officials will honor so-called immigration holds or detainers placed by federal authorities only when a suspect is booked into the Travis County Jail on charges of capital murder, aggravated sexual assault and continuous smuggling of persons. Otherwise, federal agents must have a court order or arrest warrant signed by a judge for the jail to continue housing a person whose immigration status is in question, according to Hernandez s policy, which she released Friday. The public must be confident that local law enforcement is focused on local public safety, not on federal immigration enforcement. Our jail cannot be perceived as a holding tank for ICE or that Travis County deputies are ICE officers, Hernandez said in a video announcement. My Statesman | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1481 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: FLINT, Mich. — State prosecutors filed criminal charges against six more government workers here on Friday in connection with Flint’s water contamination crisis, accusing them of concealing urgent information about the lead that was leaching into the city’s drinking water and doing nothing to stop it. The charges bring to nine the number of public employees criminally charged in the public health crisis, all midlevel bureaucrats or lower. Flint residents have been outraged that officials have so far escaped any consequences. But the Michigan attorney general, Bill Schuette, hinted at a news conference on Friday that charges against officials might follow, saying that investigators were “moving up the chain†and “going where the truth takes us, period. †The widening inquiry comes as Flint’s residents continue to cope with the effects of the contamination. Concerns about the water emerged more than two years ago, but residents’ complaints were brushed off until last fall, when Gov. Rick Snyder acknowledged the scope of the problem. Tests continue to show that unfiltered tap water is still not safe to drink, and public health workers are trying to monitor thousands of Flint children who may have been exposed to high levels of lead, which can profoundly affect growth, behavior and intelligence over time. Mr. Schuette said the employees charged Friday — three from Michigan’s Department of Health and Human Services and three from its Department of Environmental Quality — all “attempted to bury or cover up, to downplay or hide information†about the lead contamination that began in April 2014, when Flint began using the Flint River as its water supply to save money. “Their story was, there is nothing wrong with Flint water and it was perfectly safe to use,†said Mr. Schuette, a Republican who is seen as a possible candidate for governor in 2018. “In essence, these individuals concealed the truth. They were criminally wrong to do so. †The accused include Liane Shekter Smith, who led the state environmental agency’s Drinking Water and Municipal Assistance unit until she was fired in February. Prosecutors said she withheld information about the severe health risks of using the water after the lead contamination was underway and failed to protect the citizens of Flint. She was charged with one count of misconduct in office, a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, and one count of willful neglect of duty, a misdemeanor. The other Department of Environmental Quality employees charged were Adam Rosenthal, a water regulator who prosecutors said doctored reports about lead levels in Flint’s water, and Patrick Cook, another regulator they said misled officials with the federal Environmental Protection Agency about the city’s water quality. Both men were charged with misconduct in office and conspiracy. Mr. Cook was also charged with willful neglect of duty, and Mr. Rosenthal with tampering with evidence. Also charged were Nancy Peeler, the Early Childhood Health Section manager in the state’s Department of Health and Human Services Robert Scott, a data analyst for the department and Corinne Miller, a state epidemiologist. Prosecutors said the three employees learned last July of a spike in the number of Flint children with elevated blood lead levels but concealed the results. After seeing an internal report showing the increase, Mr. Schuette said, Ms. Peeler and Mr. Scott “produced a bogus report†that showed no worrisome rise in lead levels. Ms. Miller, who was the state’s top epidemiologist but has since left the job, instructed others not to take action on the initial report, Mr. Schuette said. The three are charged with one count each of misconduct in office, conspiracy and willful neglect of duty. The four employees charged Friday who were still working for the state were suspended without pay. Todd Flood, the special counsel for the investigation, noted that on the same day that the health officials learned about the spike in blood lead levels, July 28 of last year, the environmental officials charged were doctoring water quality reports, and he hinted at a broader conspiracy. “You have two agencies manipulating reports on the same day,†Mr. Flood said, “and that lock step, going to stage left, that seems significant to me. †Mr. Schuette, who said last month that investigators were having trouble getting documents they had requested from Governor Snyder’s private lawyers, said they had since had “great constructive dialogue†with Mr. Snyder’s team. The investigators refused to say whether they had interviewed Mr. Snyder, but one, Andrew Arena, said, “Nobody’s off limits, and the facts will take us to the truth. †He likened the investigation to an organized crime case, which starts with people with the expectation that they can lead them to those at the top. “You don’t start at the top with organized crime,†Mr. Arena said. “That’s what we’re doing here. †Flint began using the Flint River as its water supply to save money, but state regulators failed to require the city to add chemicals to prevent pipe corrosion, causing lead to leach into the water system. Brian P. Morley, a lawyer for Ms. Shekter Smith, said he was “surprised at these charges†and expected his client to plead not guilty. A lawyer for Ms. Miller declined to comment other defendants did not immediately return calls. Two other state employees and a Flint municipal employee — Michael Prysby, a district engineer with the environmental quality department, Stephen Busch, a district supervisor in the same department, and Michael Glasgow, Flint’s utilities manager — were charged in April in connection with the lead contamination. Mr. Glasgow has since agreed to cooperate with investigators in exchange for reduced charges. A report last month from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that children drinking Flint water had a nearly 50 percent higher chance of elevated blood lead levels during the period that the city was using river water. A local pediatrician, Dr. Mona completed her own study in September 2015 and was the first to publicly warn of the spike in lead levels. The investigators said they were also investigating a possible connection between the water contamination and an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease that sickened at least 87 people in the Flint region, with nine known deaths, from June 2014 through October 2015. “You can rest assured that that is on our radar every day,†Mr. Flood said. “That is an investigation that is ongoing, and we have the best experts in the world working with us. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1482 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did Eric Trump Say His Father Would Cancel Taxes for Wealthy People? Claim summaries: A fake news article that fabricated statements by Eric Trump got picked up by hyper-partisan web site Democratic Moms.
contextual information: On 16 April 2017 Politicalo.com published an article suggesting that the President's son Eric Trump claimed his father was going to discontinue taxation on wealthy Americans, thereby rendering debate over the elder Trump's tax returns irrelevant: Politicalo.com article As always, his son Eric was there to provide a helping hand in defending his father. During an brief phone interview with KYXL Radio based out of Orlando, Florida, President Trumps second son argued that his fathers tax return is irrelevant, largely because he knows all there is to know about following the letter of the law, especially when it comes to paying taxes. He said, When you come from a background like the one my father comes from, you have to know all there is about paying taxes and doing your part to make this country a better place. Eric continued, And while were on the subject, I kind of have to say, its funny how taxes work. They sort of punish the hardest working and most productive members of our society while taking nothing from those who would rather be lazy and beg on the streets. Thats kind of not fair. What he have here is a system that flat out punishes those who want to contribute and make their lives better and at the same time, rewards those who want to be nothing more than dead weight. The worst part is, Im not saying something thats revolutionary here; this system has been in place ever since the country was established. My father, regardless of the fact that hes president, is just one person out of millions of those who are capable enough to be successful but are simultaneously struck down by our tax system. Thats a catastrophe ... At the end of the day, its irrelevant whether my father choses to disclose his tax return or not. It wont matter soon anyway Although Newslo (and its sibling sites Religionlo, Politicops, and Politicalo) are often identified as fake news by social media users, the claim was picked up by the hyper-partisan web site Democratic Moms and spread with fewer obvious red flags. Newslo and related sites normally start each article with a paragraph of factual information followed by the embellishments featured in its headlines. Newslos "hybrid" fake news sites include a clickable feature enabling readers to "show facts" or "hide facts." When a reader clicks "show facts," the factual portions of the article are highlighted. However, by default, all articles first appear in "hide facts" mode: Newslo Religionlo Politicops Politicalo Democratic Moms fake news As the article indicated, President Trump tweeted about his tax returns and currency manipulation on 16 April 2017: Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem? We will see what happens! Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017 April 16, 2017 I did what was an almost an impossible thing to do for a Republican-easily won the Electoral College! Now Tax Returns are brought up again? Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 16, 2017 April 16, 2017 But as the "Show Facts" button demonstrated when activated, the Eric Trump's purported statements on taxation and wealth were fabricated: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1483 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Those who were shocked by the latest ABC / Washington Post goal seeking report (aka poll ) that shows Hillary opening up a 12-point lead with likely voters after the latest debate last Wednesday need to look a little further. Ironically, this poll farce was embargoed for release after 9 a.m. EST on Saturday, which made it a dominant topic of conversation on all the morning talk shows.Of course, like many of the recent polls from the likes of Reuters, ABC and The Washington Post, something curious emerges when you look just beneath the surface of the headline 12-point lead.Meanwhile, with huge variances in preference across demographics one can easily see how simple it is to rig a poll by over indexing to one group vs. another. While the pollsters release the the split of the sample pool by political affiliation, they do not share the split by any of the following demographics which are just as important to determining the outcome of the poll. Zero Hedge METHODOLOGY This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats Republicans Independents. As we ve pointed out numerous times in the past, in response to Reuters efforts to tweak their polls, per the The Pew Research Center, at least since 1992, democrats have never enjoyed a 9-point registration gap despite the folks at ABC and The Washington Post somehow convincing themselves it was a reasonable margin.Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the suspicious outlier poll that came out on Saturday night: I don t care what network you watch, maybe with Fox exempted, although certain places at Fox you ll find the same sentiment. It s over. And they all cite these polls. They all cite the polls that show Hillary up 10 to 12 points. And even take the low point at 10, I just saw somebody on CNN, a conservative Republican say, At 10 points with two weeks it s over, there s no way you can reverse that, it s history. So they all believe the polls. In fact, their belief in the polls is biblical. I think these people have a greater confidence and faith in the polls than they do in the Bible. So it s over. And, furthermore, to show you just how over it is, the Democrats are actually now in red states where Trump may win those states, but they re in there and they re working down the ballot and they re gonna win back the House, they re gonna win back the Senate, and Chuck-U Schumer is gonna end up a majority leader in the Senate.And you Republicans, you are toast, do you understand? You Republicans, it s toast, and you Republicans had better start doing your postmortems right now, and you had better starting figuring out why this happened. You lost this because you saw to it that Trump was nominated, and if you weren t for Trump, you better find out who made it possible for Trump to be nominated, and you better do something about those people. Americans who are sick and tired of a corrupt media and the corrupt politicians they prop up, need to ignore these manufactured polls. Instead of wasting time reading this drivel, Americans need to be out knocking on doors and contacting friends, to explain to them why we need a President like Trump to DRAIN THE SWAMP!There has never been a better time to ignore Hillary s media and stay focused on the prize | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1484 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Central and local governments will be more open to providing information to help the international community understand China, the official China Daily reported on Tuesday, citing a senior government official. We should be open-minded to talk about our disadvantages calmly and conflicts with other countries frankly, the paper quoted Jiang Jianguo, minister at the State Council Information Office, as saying. Jiang said China should be more confident in discussing its political thought and the way it governs, and should also not avoid talking about hot-button issues . China enforces strict controls over the media and the dissemination of information online. It has built a Great Firewall aimed at restricting overseas websites and is also cracking down on the use of virtual private networks used to circumvent censorship. In a report published last week, the U.S. non-government organization Freedom House ranked China last when it comes to internet freedom, citing censorship targeting ethnic minorities, media and regular citizens. China has also imposed restrictions on academic publications, forcing them to block access to articles judged to be in violation of local regulations. However, local authorities have also been urged to improve the accuracy, speed and transparency of economic and environmental data as part of efforts to improve their performance, and China says it is also encouraging the media to hold local officials to account. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1485 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The social rot continues in a city that was miraculously cleaned up on Mayor Giuliani s watch. All of the hard work Rudy did to fight crime and make tourists as well as residents feel safe again will all be undone by one Socialist mayor Scofflaws of New York, rejoice the City Council has cleared the way for you to litter, loiter and pee in the street to your heart s content.Watch here:New legislation dubbed the Criminal Justice Reform Act was passed by lawmakers Wednesday, giving miscreants a get-out-of-jail-free card by eliminating the criminal penalties on a raft of quality-of-life crimes.The disgusting and disturbing acts that the council voted to decriminalize include drinking alcohol out of a paper bag, lurking in parks after hours, urinating in the street and making enough of a racket to violate the noise code.Under the legislation, which Mayor Bill de Blasio is expected to sign, offenders will face only civil summonses instead of criminal citations.The main part of the reform act sponsored by Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito deals with reducing the penalty for public urination and other quality-of-life offenses. It passed by a 40-9 vote in the liberal-leaning council.It aims to keep offenders from getting a permanent criminal record and requires the NYPD to develop guidance for cops on when to issue criminal instead of civil summonses. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1486 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The European Parliament has carried out a political hatchet job for Poland. On 13 October Poland is holding parliamentary elections, and most experts connect the signing of the European Parliament's resolution with the "Acute Autumn Symptom" of the Polish delegation to the EP. The current political leadership in Poland aims to demonstrate to the voters that they are defending the "historical boundaries" and fending off Russia. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1487 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A former governor of Puerto Rico shut down a question from MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski on Wednesday when she asked about President Donald Trump s treatment of San Juan Mayor Carmen Yul n Cruz.Trump and Cruz s interactions and criticisms have drawn national attention during the process of helping Puerto Rico recover from Hurricane Maria, with Cruz charging that the Trump administration has been too slow in delivering federal assistance. Trump tweeted criticism of her over the weekend, saying she exhibited poor leadership and that others in Puerto Rico were not doing enough to get their workers to help. Upon meeting each other face-to-face on Tuesday, Cruz told Trump it was saving lives and not about politics. Trump shook her hand and then walked away.After Morning Joe played the clip, a cross-armed Brzezinski looked disgusted. After welcoming former Puerto Rico Gov. Luis Fortu o to the show, she asked him what he made of Trump s treatment of Cruz. I m very sorry, Mika, but I m not going to get into local politics, Fortu o said.Brzezinski did a double take upon hearing his answer. If she s running for governor, there are different parties I don t care, Fortu o said. I care about results. Is that what you think it is? Brzezinski asked. You think it was politics that had him attacking her? I have no idea, he said. All I can tell you is we need results. We have people that desperately need help. As long as we get that help, we should not be talking about politics at this moment. WFB | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1488 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A U.S. judge on Wednesday blocked sections of a Texas law intended to punish so-called “sanctuary citiesâ€, regarded as soft on immigration, in a ruling handed down two days before the law was due to come into effect. Chief U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio’s federal court found the Texas legislation was unlikely to withstand constitutional scrutiny. The judge’s ruling temporarily blocks part of the law that would require local law enforcement agencies in Texas to fulfill requests by U.S. immigration agents to hold immigrants in their jails until they can be picked up for deportation. It also strikes down a provision that would have prevented local officials from adopting policies that might limit immigration enforcement in the state. “The court cannot and does not second-guess the legislature, Garcia wrote in a 94-page decision. “However, the state may not exercise its authority in a manner that violates the United States Constitution.†The decision in Texas could have ramifications nationwide as other Republican-controlled states are looking at legislation targeting sanctuary cities, which they say illegally shield immigrants. The Texas law, which takes aim at any jurisdiction that refuses to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, is considered one of the toughest anti-illegal immigration efforts in the country. The ruling will make Texas communities less safe, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, said in a statement. “This decision will be appealed immediately and I am confident Texas’ law will be found constitutional and ultimately be upheld,†he added. It was the first law of its kind passed since President Donald Trump took office in January, pledging to crack down on illegal immigration. The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the Texas measure in a lawsuit on behalf of some local jurisdictions in the state. “The court was right to strike down virtually all of this patently unconstitutional law,†Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU’s immigrant rights project, said in a statement. The impending law added to the anxiety felt by some illegal immigrants forced to evacuate their flooded homes in Houston after Hurricane Harvey struck southeast Texas. Nevertheless, federal agents are not enforcing immigration law at evacuation sites, shelters or food banks where people affected by flooding are seeking aid, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said in a statement on Wednesday. Some police chiefs have said forcing local police to work with U.S. immigration agents undermines community trust, making immigrants less likely to report crimes. “This week’s crisis with Hurricane Harvey is just the most recent example why people need to feel safe approaching our local police and support groups, no matter what,†Steve Adler, mayor of Texas’ state capital Austin, said in a statement. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1489 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The European Union is seeking to reopen its embassy in Libya pending security conditions, officials said on Tuesday, offering further political support for the Tripoli government struggling to establish control. EU leaders will announce at their summit in Brussels on Oct. 19-20 that they encourage work underway to rapidly establish a permanent EU presence in Libya , according to their draft joint statement seen by Reuters. But the statement makes clear no such move is imminent as it would be conditional on improving the security situation on the ground. The EU moved its mission to neighboring Tunisia in mid-2014 as security worsened in Libya amid escalating fighting between rival factions since the 2011 fall of longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi, ousted by rebels during a NATO bombing campaign. Of 28 EU states, only Italy, Libya s former colonial master and still the most influential European state on the ground, has an embassy in the country, where the United Nations has officially recognized the government of Fayez Seraj. The EU has also engaged increasingly with Seraj, especially as it sought Libya s help in curbing the flow of African refugees and migrants, hundreds of thousands of whom have been boarding smugglers boats on the coast of the lawless state to cross the Mediterranean for Europe. The bloc has financed, equipped and trained Libya s border and coast guards, despite rights groups sounding alarm over grave abuses refugees and migrants suffer in Libya. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1490 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: 450K Facebook Users Fell for This Toyota Tundra Giveaway Scam Claim summaries: Here's the lowdown on what these scammers were looking to accomplish.
contextual information: On Dec. 15, 2023, we received reader mail inquiring about a purported giveaway on Facebook that promised one winner a 2023 Toyota Tundra pickup truck. The numerous Facebook pages promoting the supposed giveaway were named 2023 Tundra, TRD. One of the posts read as follows and directed users to a sites.google.com website: "Christmas surprise! This Toyota Tundra wasn't sold, so we're giving it to someone by December 19th who $hared. Register here." Another post asked users to enter the giveaway in the comments by typing "@" and then clicking on "highlight." In the pinned comment under the post, users were directed to visit a website to "validate" their entry. However, none of these posts hosted a genuine giveaway for a 2023 Toyota Tundra. All of this was a scam, apparently designed to entice users to fill out surveys, sign up for "free trials" on websites, and perform other tasks, at least partially to allow the scammers to obtain an affiliate-marketing commission. In other words, it was a waste of time—and a potentially dangerous one at that—for users who hoped to win a free pickup truck. Unfortunately, as of Dec. 15, over 450,000 users had commented on just one of the posts. It's unclear how many of these users continued with the scam by clicking on one of the links. The reason the scammers asked users to type "@" in the comments and then click "highlight" was to boost the page's following. This would potentially help the scammer sell the follower-filled page in the future, if that was the goal. Based on the actions of scammers over the last several years, it's likely that they will attempt the same fake giveaway strategy in the future using the makes and models of other cars. For any users who fell for these scams and provided their financial information (e.g., a credit card number), we recommend retracing your steps and ensuring that any "free trials" you signed up for are canceled, so that no future charges appear on your statement. Call your credit card company for further advice. For further reading, the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) published an article about how to spot fake giveaways on social media. One of those tips mentioned finding out if the Facebook page offering the giveaway has a verified badge. If it has a verified badge, it's likely a legitimate giveaway. However, scammers have been known to seize accounts with verified badges to advertise their scams, so bear in mind that this is not a foolproof tip. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1491 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The rise of political polarization in the U.S. government has been mirrored by a similar trend of growing animosity between people who support different parties. But how have these – often uncivil – rivalries arisen? Using data from two representative surveys of Americans in 2010 and 2012, Patrick R. Miller find that partisans treat politics as they would a sports rivalry, with parties viewed in terms of good and evil, with a strong motivation to win at any cost, often independent of policy outcomes. He also finds that not only are those that view politics as a rivalry the most politically knowledgeable, they are also the most vicious, uncivil, and party-driven voters. This hostile mindset is made worse by a combination of competitive elections and politicians who further fan the flames of partisan rivalries.
Americans are justifiably cynical about politics. Congress is more polarized than ever, leaving ideological extremists to govern a more centrist citizenry. Lawmakers seem incapable of civil compromise on even uncontroversial issues; leaving Washington gridlocked on pressing policy problems. But an ugly truth of American politics today is that average citizens too readily condemn politicians for our political problems without owning their role in enabling that dysfunction. If our politicians are aggressively and uncompromisingly uncivil, they make just be reflecting the voters who elected them.
My coauthor, Pamela Johnston Conover, and I have been researching the nature of political party identities in America since 2010. Political scientists around that time began researching a growing social distance between average Republicans and Democrats, even in nonpolitical respects like comfort with one’s child marrying someone of the other party. What is it about parties, we wondered, that could elicit such intense hostility between everyday people?
For us, the answer is in how people construct their sense of self. All of us are attached to identities—national, racial, religious, schools, and even parties—that shape who we believe we are and how we perceive the world. Like our religions, many Americans inherit party attachment from their parents. Many of us learn that we are Democrats or Republicans long before we learn that those loyalties mean that we should be liberal or conservative, pro-choice or pro-life, or for or against the social welfare state.
In new research we focus on average partisans—everyday Democrats and Republicans—and their potentially unhealthy political attitudes. Politics in an intensely polarized era like today reinforces for citizens that the parties are not just distinct, but starkly different in belief and who they favor. And our regular elections ensure that our party team always has another “game†with the other team looming. We show that this creates an environment where many partisans treat politics like a sports rivalry, akin to Kansas-Missouri or UNC-Duke in college sports. Partisans with that mentality view politics in stark good-evil terms and are motivated to participate in politics foremost by a strong desire to win at any cost.
We conducted two nationally representative surveys of Americans in 2010 and 2012. Before fielding the surveys, we conducted extensive interviews with average partisans to better understand the mentality that our surveys would assess. When we asked what motivated them to vote, many partisans seemingly did not connect that a party must win an election to advance policy. Instead, many talked about victory and policy ends as if they were disconnected or competing motivations (lesson: be wary of assuming that average citizens think strategically about politics).
Accordingly, we asked partisans about their electoral motivations. The survey showed that 41 percent of partisans agreed that simply winning elections is more important to them than policy or ideological goals. Just 35 percent agreed that policy is a more important motivator for them to participate in politics. Only 24 percent valued both equally.
Troublingly, 38 percent of partisans agreed that their parties should use any tactics necessary to “win elections and issue debates.†When those who agreed with this view were asked what tactics they had in mind, the most common ones they offered were: voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats, lying, personal attacks on opponents, not allowing the other party to speak, and using the filibuster to gridlock Congress. Democrats and Republicans were equally likely to express this incivility.
These sentiments about victory and incivility were most common among partisans who most strongly viewed the opposing party as a “rival.†These most hostile partisans also expressed the strongest partisanship and the greatest anger at the other party. And curiously, these same citizens were also the most politically knowledgeable when asked a battery of basic political knowledge questions, meaning that our most informed citizens are also the most vicious, uncivil, and party-driven voters. These effects were also independent of ideological or issue positions, which means that once a partisan develops a sense of strong interparty rivalry, it turns into a hostile dynamic with a psychological life of its own.
So there is a certain type of voter—thankfully not all—for whom politics is primarily about group loyalty and using any means to claim victory over their rivals. Not about issues per se. Not about ideology or candidates. Just “we’re good, they’re bad, and let’s win.†But so what? Two other results from our research imply a lot about American politics today.
First, competitive elections exacerbated these hostile attitudes toward the other party. Using Cook Political Report rankings for both survey years, we found that partisans voting in the most competitive races reported the highest levels of rivalry, desire to win, and incivility. What does that say about political campaigns? For some voters, sure, elections are about issues and selecting a compatible candidate. But for many partisan voters, those same elections are just red meat riling them up over the symbolism of party labels. Rather than bringing us together to discuss our differences and deliberate, our elections are alienating many of us from one another.
Second, these most hostile partisans were also the most likely to participate in campaigns (volunteer, donate money, persuade friends, etc.) and vote. Think about the implications of that. Candidates depend on others’ resources and votes to win, especially from their own parties. So if the most mobilized partisans are also the most hostile toward the other party, then a major incentive for politicians is to placate that hostility even if it poisons the political environment. They can do that in campaigns with vitriolic and often relatively issueless partisan appeals, but also by acting as “partisan warriors†in office: not compromising, abusing the filibuster, or stridently partisan press appearances on Fox and MSNBC.
Easy as it is to blame politicians for dysfunctional politics, citizens have some responsibility for enabling that ineptitude. In reality, the intense polarization of American politics likely results from a two way give and take: electorates produce uncompromising and uncivil politicians partly because those politicians may best appeal to the most mobilized partisan voter. But through campaigns and the partisan press, politicians also lead partisans to a hostile mindset where they view the other party as an evil rival.
Obviously, many believe that fierce partisanship is a good thing. In practice, though, our Founders designed a government to force compromise between factions, and a system where it is unlikely that any one party will gain such complete control of government that compromise is unnecessary. It is easy for partisans who never shoulder any responsibility for making government policy work to view politics as a sport where purity, loyalty, and contempt for the opposition make a good game. But whether they make good government is a whole other matter.
This article is based on the paper, “Red and Blue States of Mind: Partisan Hostility and Voting in the United States†in Political Research Quarterly.
Please read our comments policy before commenting.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USApp– American Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.
Patrick R. Miller – University of Kansas
Patrick R. Miller is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Kansas. He specializes in American public opinion, political psychology, elections, and survey and experimental methodology. His current research focuses on civility and partisan identity in the U.S. He tweets about politics at twitter.com/pmiller1693. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1492 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Barry, the Democratic party has done nothing for the black American. Your presidency has proved that. And you re going to call us disrespectful if we don t vote for Hillary? I m insulted you even asked Barry. https://twitter.com/hectormorenco/status/780254967273693185Obama's Legacy: Almost 8 years of Violence, rioting, looting & burning down communities. Time 4 real change. Everyone Should vote Trump! Diamond and Silk (@DiamondandSilk) September 22, 2016Obama's legacy of hate and racism is about to end, in 50 days @POTUS MT Gilbert (@tponews) September 20, 2016Since Obama has come into office terrorist attacks and race riots have become a regular occurrence. Hillary will only continue this legacy. Hispanics for Trump (@HispanicsTrump) September 23, 2016Here s angry Obama threatening the Black community to vote for him:https://twitter.com/P0TUSTrump/status/777707415601049600Here is a brilliant response to Obama s threat by an outspoken black critic of Obama s insulting presidency:Here are more responses to Obama s angry demand that minorities support Hillary, lest he be insulted .LOL!SeriouslyWe're not slaves anymore. No Obama, we're not voting for Clinton bc of your legacy honey. Put the pipe down #CrackIsWack RejoiceMagazine.net (@TemiaBrinson) September 19, 2016Obama claims that Trump is out to ruin his legacy, no honey, Trump is out to #MAGA. You ruined your own legacy by being a terrible president Black Women 4 Trump (@TallahForTrump) September 18, 2016I'm insulted by Obama more concerned about his damn legacy! What? Transgendered toilets? Ex-Dem Latina (@terrymendozer) September 19, 2016https://twitter.com/P0TUSTrump/status/776625654762725376As an added bonus, we ve included a few additional remarks from American voters about Barack s legacy:LIST: The Race Riots https://t.co/lM7Kye9lxw DRUDGE REPORT (@DRUDGE_REPORT) September 25, 2016https://twitter.com/CajunKangaroo/status/779830457445781504You cut a deal to ransom Americans from Iran, Obama.You funnelled > a BILLION dollars to our ENEMY.This is your 'legacy?'Enjoy. Linda Suhler, Ph.D. (@LindaSuhler) September 23, 2016https://twitter.com/NolteNC/status/780001984522977280Obamacare is imploding, Obama.In six years you single-handedly destroyed America's healthcare system.Some 'legacy.'Enjoy. Linda Suhler, Ph.D. (@LindaSuhler) September 23, 2016Let us know if we missed anything in the comment section below. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1493 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn told Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday to step aside and make way for the Labour party to lead Britain s Brexit talks, saying his leftist ideas were now the political mainstream . After taking the stage at his party s annual conference to a standing ovation and chants of Oh, Jeremy Corbyn , the leftist leader, once written off by some lawmakers for driving the party into unelectable territory, said Labour was ready for power. Corbyn is keen to press home his advantage over May, who is struggling to unite her party over Britain s negotiations to leave the European Union and to keep her own position. She faces a threat from some in the Conservatives who cannot forgive her for the loss of their parliamentary majority in a June election she called. Against all predictions, in June we won the largest increase in the Labour vote since 1945 and achieved Labour s best vote for a generation. It s a result which has put the Tories (Conservatives) on notice and Labour on the threshold of power, Corbyn said in his speech. Yes, we didn t do quite well enough and we remain in opposition for now. But we have become a government-in-waiting. And our message to the country could not be clearer: Labour is ready. Labour is closing the gap in opinion polls to stand roughly level with the Conservatives, putting it within sight of winning an election. The Conservatives have said they have no plans to call a vote anytime before 2022. The party is dependent on the support of the small Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) for a majority in parliament, however. So far, there is little appetite in the Conservative Party to hold an early election, and no clear frontrunner to replace May. The party s deal with the DUP, however, could be hurt by a trade spat involving Canadian planemaker Bombardier, Northern Ireland s largest manufacturing employer. Most Conservatives do not want to open the way for Corbyn, whose promises to end austerity have won over many voters, particularly the young, and who has focused anger over a deadly fire in west London on what he called a government which sees itself not as the servant of the people but of global corporations . Corbyn has tapped into discontent in Britain, a wider trend seen across Western Europe where the dominance of traditional parties and their beliefs have been increasingly challenged. With his aides working on the belief that May will be forced into an early election before Britain leaves the EU in March 2019, the party has started to develop their policies, ready to introduce them swiftly. It feels like we ve won, it feels like we re there, it feels like we re in government. The only frustrating thing is we re not, yet, said Chris Howes, an 18 year-old party activist from central England. But we re ready whenever the election comes. After being discounted for pursuing what his critics said were policies harking back to the 1980s when Labour lost power to the Conservatives, Corbyn said Britain was ready for change and his party was ready to move further along its leftist route. Adding to his policies on renationalization, ending university tuition fees and increased public spending, he said he would bring in a housing policy to make sure local councils would have to win a ballot of existing tenants and leaseholders before any redevelopment plans could go ahead. We need to build a still broader consensus around the priorities we set in the election, making the case for both compassion and collective aspiration, he said. We are now the political mainstream. Turning the tables on May who before the June election said Corbyn would lead a coalition of chaos if voted in, Corbyn now said her cabinet of top ministers were the ones who had failed so far to negotiate with the EU as one. This rag-tag cabinet spends more time negotiating with each other than they do with the EU. A cliff-edge Brexit is at risk of becoming a reality, he said. That is why Labour has made clear that Britain should stay within the basic terms of the single market and a customs union for a limited transition period. Labour has also been divided on the issue of Brexit, however. London Mayor Sadiq Khan, a prominent member of the party, said in a newspaper interview on Tuesday that he would back holding a second referendum on whether to leave the EU, a position the party itself has not suggested so far. Corbyn told members that if in power, Labour would pursue a jobs first Brexit, one that guaranteed unimpeded access to the single market. So I have a simple message to the cabinet for Britain s sake pull yourself together, or make way. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1494 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: LONDON — Libyan fighters declared victory over the Islamic State at its coastal stronghold of Surt on Tuesday, ending the extremist group’s ambitions for a caliphate on the southern shores of the Mediterranean. “The battle is finally over,†said Reda Eissa, a spokesman for the coalition of militias from nearby Misurata that led the assault. “Our fighters are ecstatic. We still have to comb through the city and make sure we got them all, but we are so, so happy. †The Libyan fighters’ apparent success was another defeat for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, as its plans for a militant empire buckle on multiple fronts across the Middle East. In Surt, the Misuratan militias finally ousted the remaining Islamic State fighters from a cluster of houses after a grueling assault that pitted suicide bombers and snipers against Libyan forces backed by American warplanes. After moving into Surt in 2014, the Islamic State seized a stretch of coastline and instituted a brutal reign that included public killings and the imprisonment of migrants as sex slaves. The city became a transit hub for fighters traveling to Tunisia, as well as a supply stop and medical treatment center for Islamists fighting in eastern Libya. The Misuratan brigades began their drive toward Islamic State positions in Surt in May. American warplanes joined the effort in August, carrying out at least 490 sorties over the city while fighting raged in the streets below. Even as the Misuratan brigades celebrated on Tuesday, analysts warned that the Islamic State could still regroup in other parts of Libya by exploiting the economic ruin and political vacuum that has dogged the country since the ouster of Col. Muammar in 2011. “I’m concerned about the pockets of marginalization, and in some areas jihadist presence, that they could use to reconfigure,†said Frederic Wehrey, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, citing the presence of Islamic State forces in Tripoli, Benghazi and the desert town of Sabha. Islamic State fighters could carry out bombings in an attempt to destabilize the fragile United government in Tripoli, the capital, Mr. Wehrey said. But it is unlikely that the Islamic State will be able to capture such a significant town again, he added. During the battle for Surt, both sides faced accusations of human rights abuses. Many of the sex slaves held by the Islamic State in Surt were African migrants captured as they crossed the Libyan Desert in hopes of reaching the coast so they could make the perilous sea journey to Europe. At least 100 women and children who escaped Surt during the fighting, many from Eritrea, are being held at a prison in Misurata where they have given accounts of being abused and . The Libyan fighters from Misurata have faced accusations of torture and summary killings. A video recently emerged showing Misuratan militiamen interrogating and threatening to kill an Islamic State fighter named Mletan. Photographs that later circulated online showed the mutilated body of what appeared to be the same man being dragged along a street. Hanan Salah, a Libya researcher at Human Rights Watch, said on Tuesday that she had received reports from Libya that some public hospitals in Misurata had refused to treat civilians fleeing Surt on suspicion that they were members of the Islamic State. “The authorities are required to provide medical care to all those fleeing the fighting and who are in need of it, without distinction,†Ms. Salah said. The fall of Surt coincides with a concerted drive against the Islamic State in the Iraqi city of Mosul and a rapidly shifting fight in Syria. On Tuesday, Iraqi forces started shelling part of western Mosul as they prepared to open a new front in a battle now in its eighth week. The Misurata militias now in control of Surt nominally fight under the banner of the United government in Tripoli, led by Prime Minister Fayez Serraj — one of three rival administrations vying for control of Libya. The United States also supports the unity government. But the government is weak, having failed to extend its authority even over Tripoli since it started work in March. And many leaders of the Misurata militias are more concerned about Gen. Khalifa Hifter, a strongman who dominates Benghazi and the east of the country, than about the Islamic State. During a tour of the Surt battlefield in June, Misuratan commanders said they believed the Islamic State fighters were being controlled secretly by General Hifter as part of his wider ambition to seize control of Libya. There is little evidence to back that assertion — General Hifter is fighting against Islamic State militants, although opportunistic alliances are common on all sides of the conflict — but the heated talk illustrates the difficulty of bringing the country to a political settlement. Last week in Tripoli, the most violent clashes in two years erupted between competing factions, and one group blocked a major highway with shipping containers. Mr. Serraj’s administration was left to watch helplessly. The United Nations envoy to Libya, Martin Kobler, said he was “extremely alarmed†by the clashes, and Mark C. Toner, a State Department spokesman, said on Monday that the warring factions should rally behind the faltering unity government. Another uncertainty in Libya concerns the policy of the new administration of Donald J. Trump in the United States. On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump vowed to defeat the Islamic State but said he was averse to becoming involved in foreign countries. Mr. Trump’s expressed willingness to work with Russia and Egypt could lead to an alignment of United States efforts with those two countries’ policies in Libya. Egypt is a strong supporter of General Hifter, but the Obama administration has kept its distance from the general, who once worked for the C. I. A. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1495 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Marco Rubio sounded so robotic during the last GOP debate that people are now trolling him by dressing up as robots.As you ll recall, Rubio had a terrible performance on Saturday night thanks to the efforts of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. Christie nailed Rubio for repeating the same line over and over again in a matter of minutes as if the Florida Senator malfunctioned and became a broken record. Let s dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn t know what he s doing, Rubio said in response to Christie s charge that Rubio lacks the experience to be president. He knows exactly what he s doing. Rubio would go on to repeat the line several more times. Let s dispel with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn t know what he s doing. He knows exactly what he s doing. Here s the bottom line. This notion that Barack Obama doesn t know what he s doing is just not true. He knows exactly what he s doing. Christie didn t let Rubio get away with it either. Christie accused Rubio of being scripted. This is what Washington D.C. does, Christie said. The drive-by shot at the beginning with incorrect and incomplete information and then the memorized 25-second speech. That is exactly what his advisers gave him. It was a disaster for Rubio, especially since he looked to be rising in the New Hampshire polls. But now, he s seen as a robot who is pre-programmed to say certain things.And he s not going to able to forget about his robotic blunder any time soon.Some clever people had the brilliant idea to troll Rubio by dressing up as robots. In the Twitter image below, you can see two guys in their robot gear. One is named Marco Roboto and the other is called Rubio Talking Point 3000.Outside Rubio s 1st NH event today, per @InesdLC: Marco Roboto + Rubio Talking Point 3000, from @American_Bridge pic.twitter.com/ISqYoSg9cP Ben Siegel (@benyc) February 7, 2016As if the Republican primary couldn t get any stranger, we now have robots trolling the candidates and we have Marco Rubio to thank for it.Domo arigato, Marco Roboto. Featured image from Digital Journal | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1496 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter “If it does indeed turn out that there is relevant physical evidence, if this evidence is carefully collected and analyzed, and if this analysis leads to the identification of several facts concerning the UFO phenomenon, then will be the time for scientists to step back and ask, what are these facts trying to tell us? If those facts are strong enough to lead to a firm conclusion, then will be the time to confront the more bizarre questions. If, for instance, it turns out that all physical evidence is consistent with a mundane interpretation of the causes of UFO reports, there will be little reason to continue to speculate about the role of extraterrestrial beings. If, on the other hand, the analysis of physical evidence turns up very strong evidence that objects related with UFO reports were manufactured outside the solar system, then one must obviously consider very seriously that the phenomenon involves not only extraterrestrial vehicles but probably also extraterrestrial beings.” ( source ) The quote above comes from Peter Andrew Sturrock , a British Scientist, and an Emeritus Professor of Applied Physics at Stanford University. Sturrock and a number of other notable scientists around the world came together during the 1990’s in order to examine the physical evidence that is commonly associated with the UFO phenomenon. One example used by Sturrock in his analysis, was a photo taken by two Royal Canadian Air Force pilots on August 27th, 1956, in McCleod, Alberta, Canada. ( “Physical Evidence Related To UFO Reports”– The Sturrock Panel Report – Electromagnetic Effects ) ( source ) ( source ) The pilots were flying in a formation of four F86 Sabre jet aircraft. One of the pilots described the phenomenon as a “bright light which was sharply defined as disk-shaped,” that looked like “a shiny silver dollar sitting horizontal.” Another pilot managed to photograph the object, as you can see above. The sighting lasted for a couple of minutes, and this specific case was analyzed by Dr. Bruce Maccabee, who estimated (from available data) that the luminosity of the object (the power output within the spectral range of the film) to be many megawatts. The Sturrock Panel also found it to be the case that a strong magnetic field surrounding the phenomenon or object was a common occurrence. Maccabee published his analysis in the Journal of Scientific Exploration (“Optical Power Output of an Unidentified High Altitude Light Source,” published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, vol. 13, #2, 1999). He also published one in 1994 titled “Strong Magnetic Field Detected Following a Sighting of an Unidentified Flying Object,” in the same journal (8, #3, 347) Dr. Jacques Vallee, notable for co-developing the first computerized mapping of Mars for NASA, and for his work at SRI International on the network information center for ARPANET , a precursor to the modern Internet, also published a paper in the Journal of Scientific Exploration titled “Estimates of Optical Power Output in Six Cases Of Unexplained Ariel Objects With Defined Luminosity Characteristics.” ( source )( source ) This particular case is also referenced in this paper. One thing is for certain, it’s one of multiple strange phenomena that has and continues to interest a large portion of the scientific community. Here is a video of former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer speaking about the fields around these objects, and what some of them were doing to military planes. Let’s just be clear, these objects are commonly seen, tracked on air radar, and tracked on ground radar simultaneously. This is something that has happened hundreds, if not thousands of times. This is information that’s been made public over the past few years. For example, a declassified Defence Intelligence Agency document shows one (out of thousands) great example. It details how two F-4 interceptor pilots reported seeing an object visually, it was also tracked on their airborne radar. Both planes experienced critical instrumentation and electronics going offline at a distance of twenty-five miles from the object. Here is an excerpt from the report: “As the F-4 approached a range of 25 nautical miles it lost all instrumentation and communications. When the F-4 turned away from the object and apparently was no longer a threat to it, the aircraft regained all instrumentation and communications. Another brightly lighted object came out of the original object. The second object headed straight toward the F4. ” (source) The report also described how a smaller object detached from the bigger object, turned inside the arc of the F-4 itself, and then rejoined the original object. This incident lasted for several hours. I decided to use this example because it has a number of declassified supporting national security documents, which goes to show how seriously this event was taken. “Behind the scenes, high ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense.” Former head of the CIA, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, 1960 (source, NY Times) It’s only now that more people are starting to become aware of this information. Here is a quote from Senator Barry Goldwater before the de-classification of all of these files: “This thing has gotten so highly-classified… it is just impossible to get anything on it. I have no idea who controls the flow of need-to-know because, frankly, I was told in such an emphatic way that it was none of my business that I’ve never tried to make it to be my business since. I have been interested in this subject for a long time and I do know that whatever the Air Force has on the subject is going to remain highly classified.” – Senator Barry Goldwater , Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee (source) Below is a great clip from author and researcher Richard Dolan , taken from The Citizens Hearing On Disclosure summing it all up in one short speech.
The Sacred Science follows eight people from around the world, with varying physical and psychological illnesses, as they embark on a one-month healing journey into the heart of the Amazon jungle.
You can watch this documentary film FREE for 10 days by clicking here.
"If “Survivor” was actually real and had stakes worth caring about, it would be what happens here, and “The Sacred Science” hopefully is merely one in a long line of exciting endeavors from this group." - Billy Okeefe, McClatchy Tribune | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1497 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: EXTREME POSITIONS ON ABORTIONHillary Clinton positioned herself as a moderate on abortion for much of her career, but now holds the most extreme positions on abortion of any presidential candidate ever.Here are three reasons why:1. She wants taxpayers to pay for abortion.Clinton supports government funding for abortion. On June 10, Clinton delivered a speech at a Planned Parenthood event in which she called for repealing the Hyde Amendment, a policy that prevents taxpayer funding for abortion. Let s repeal laws like the Hyde Amendment that make it nearly impossible for low-income women, disproportionately women of color, to exercise their full reproductive rights, she said.The Democratic National Committee added this goal to its platform after Clinton became the nominee.An August YouGov poll found that 55 percent of Americans support the Hyde Amendment. This includes a large number of Democrats, who are about evenly divided. Forty-one percent of Democrats support the ban on abortion funding while 44 percent oppose it, which is within the poll s margin of error (4.8 percentage points for the full sample).2. She supports abortion until birth.Clinton supports abortion up until the moment of birth.She doesn t say it exactly like that, of course, because it sounds awful when you say a baby can be legally killed right before she s born. Instead, Clinton uses some shifty Clintonian lingo.Clinton has said she supports restrictions only in the third trimester and only if there are exceptions for the life and health of the mother. (In one interview she said there should only be restrictions at the very end of the third trimester. ) But as Clinton understands, and most voters don t, the health exception is just a huge loophole that allows for abortion for any reason.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Doe v. Bolton, the companion case to Roe v. Wade, that the health exception can be whatever the abortionist decides it is.An abortionist s medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman s age relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health, the court decided.So, when Clinton says she ll only support abortion restrictions in the third trimester if there is a health exception, she is effectually saying there should be no restrictions on abortion through the entire pregnancy. She admits this when pressed on the issue.In an April appearance on ABC s The View, Clinton was asked if she supports legal abortion just hours before delivery, and she agreed. That same week, on NBC s Meet the Press, she was asked, when or if does an unborn child have constitutional rights? She answered, the unborn person doesn t have constitutional rights. A July 16 Marist poll found that only 13 percent of Americans think abortion should be legal through the entire pregnancy. Similarly, a 2012 Gallup poll found only 14 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal in the last three months of pregnancy, and a July 2014 HuffPost/YouGov poll found that 59 percent of Americans support a ban on abortions after 20-weeks of gestation, which is during the second trimester. 3. She thinks abortion should be common, not rare.Clinton no longer argues that abortion should be rare.During his 1992 presidential campaign, Clinton s husband, Bill, said that abortion should be safe, legal and rare. It was controversial at the time within the pro-choice community because saying that abortion should be rare implies that there is something wrong with getting an abortion. (What could that be?) But the phrase helped establish Bill Clinton s public image as a moderate on abortion.Read more: Christian Post | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD1498 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: In blunt testimony revealed on Tuesday, former managers of Trump University, the school started by Donald J. Trump, portray it as an unscrupulous business that relied on sales tactics, employed unqualified instructors, made deceptive claims and exploited vulnerable students willing to pay tens of thousands for Mr. Trump’s insights. One sales manager for Trump University, Ronald Schnackenberg, recounted how he was reprimanded for not pushing a financially struggling couple hard enough to sign up for a $35, 000 real estate class, despite his conclusion that it would endanger their economic future. He watched with disgust, he said, as a fellow Trump University salesman persuaded the couple to purchase the class anyway. “I believe that Trump University was a fraudulent scheme,†Mr. Schnackenberg wrote in his testimony, “and that it preyed upon the elderly and uneducated to separate them from their money. †For Mr. Trump, whose presidential campaign hinges on his reputation as a businessman, the newly unsealed documents offer an unflattering snapshot of his career since branching out, over the past decade, from building skyscrapers into endeavors that cashed in on his name to sell everything from water and steaks to ties and education. The release of the documents on Tuesday, under court order, was the latest turn in a federal lawsuit, filed in California by dissatisfied former Trump University students, that has bedeviled the businessman since 2010 and could trail him into the White House if he is elected president. Mr. Trump, who started the university in 2005, owned 93 percent of the company. From the start, he acted as its chief promoter, rather than manager, selling it as a tool of financial empowerment that would improve life for thousands of ordinary Americans. It would, he said, “teach you better than the best business school,†according to the transcript of a Web video. Within the documents made public Tuesday were internal employee guides encouraging customers with little money to pay for the tuition with their credit cards. “We teach the technique of using OPM . .. Other People’s Money,†explained the internal instructions for salespeople. The documents pushed employees to exploit the emotions of potential customers. “Let them know you’ve found an answer to their problems,†read confidential instructions to salespeople. The most striking documents were written testimony from former employees of Trump University who said they had become disenchanted with the university’s tactics and culture. Corrine Sommer, an event manager, recounted how colleagues encouraged students to open up as many credit cards as possible to pay for classes that many of them could not afford. “It’s O. K. just max out your credit card,†Ms. Sommer recalled their saying. Jason Nicholas, a sales executive at Trump University, recalled a deceptive pitch used to lure students — that Mr. Trump would be “actively involved†in their education. “This was not true,†Mr. Nicholas testified, saying Mr. Trump was hardly involved at all. Trump University, Mr. Nicholas concluded, was “a facade, a total lie. †Lawyers for Mr. Trump on Tuesday challenged those characterizations, saying that the testimony of the former Trump University employees “was completely discredited†in depositions taken for the California lawsuit. Lawyers for Mr. Trump declined to release those depositions on Tuesday. As he has in the past, Mr. Trump argued through representatives that the complaints emanated from a small number of former students and that the vast majority had offered positive reviews of their experience. “Trump University looks forward to using this evidence, along with much more, to win when the case is brought before a jury,†said Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump. The court records show the role that Mr. Trump — and his outsize reputation — played in trying to sell the real estate classes to thousands of students. Marketing materials bearing his signature encouraged prospective students to take advantage of a downturn in the housing market to earn quick profits. He offered the kind of assurances that financial advisers have long cautioned consumers to be wary of. “How would you like to your financial future,†Mr. Trump asked in one brochure. Mr. Trump started the Trump University just as the overheated American housing market neared its peak, promising that its classes would impart his wisdom about real estate and moneymaking to the general public. But dozens of complaints about the school rolled into the offices of attorneys general in Florida, Texas, New York and Illinois, officials said, prompting multiple investigations and, eventually, the lawsuit from former students in California. Mr. Trump had fought Tuesday’s release of previously sealed documents in the case. In an apparent attempt to discredit the judge in the case, Gonzalo P. Curiel, Mr. Trump called him biased and a “hater of Donald Trump,†and he sought to draw attention to the judge’s ethnic background — “we believe Mexican,†Mr. Trump said. (Mr. Curiel was born in Indiana he is of Mexican descent.) On Friday, in response to a legal motion filed by The Washington Post, Judge Curiel ruled that the records be released. Some of the documents unsealed Tuesday were previously made public in connection with other lawsuits. The internal guidebooks for employees of Trump University provide a detailed set of instructions for how to sell the classes, even to skeptical and reluctant consumers, by tapping into their psychological needs. A chart outlines the stages of the “roller coaster of emotions†that a buyer will experience. (The “Blast†phase, it explains, is “giving your clients hope again. †The “Probe†phase, it says, must “slowly bring the client back down to reality. â€) When it comes to selling the classes, the guidebooks leave little to chance. Inside the rooms where students are asked to enroll in classes, workers are asked to “confirm that room temperature is no more than 68 degrees. †Of course, Mr. Trump and the promise of his engagement with the school was the biggest draw of all. In the documents released Tuesday, instructors described themselves as “ †by Mr. Trump. But in a deposition related to the lawsuit, Mr. Trump acknowledged that he did not pick the instructors. Not all the documents made public on Tuesday were critical. Many former students said the classes delivered exactly what they had expected. “Trump University definitely made me more prepared to tackle the ‘real world’ of real estate investing,†wrote David Wright Jr. who signed up for a program. “We really learned a lot of from Trump University and have found a modicum of success,†wrote another student, Kissy Gordon. Former employees like Ms. Sommer took a dimmer view of the school. In her testimony, she said she was startled by the qualifications of some Trump University instructors. Ms. Sommer recalled that a member of the Trump University sales team, who had previously sold jewelry, was promoted to become an instructor. He had “no real estate experience,†she said. She added that many of the instructors had the quality that the school seemed to value most: “They were skilled at sales,†she said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD1499 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Clinton Paid 'Hard Drive Destruction' Company Claim summaries: Hillary Clinton's campaign made payments to data destruction companies, but no evidence links those services to her controversial use of a private e-mail server.
contextual information: On May 3, 2016, the website Washington Free Beacon published an article provocatively titled "Clinton Campaign Made Payments to Hard Drive and Document Destruction Company" (subtitled "Payments could have purchased destruction of 14 hard drives"). The article reported that the Hillary Clinton campaign made payments totaling $187 to a document destruction company, American Document Destruction, Inc., in February and March of 2016. It implied (without directly stating) that the Clinton campaign might have spent the funds on destroying disk drives involved in the controversy surrounding Clinton's use of private, home-based servers and accounts for official business conducted while she served as U.S. Secretary of State. Campaign finance records show that the Hillary Clinton campaign made multiple payments to a company specializing in hard drive and document destruction. The payments, recorded in February and March of 2016, went to the Nevada-based American Document Destruction, Inc., which claims expertise in destroying hard drives and other materials. "Our hard drive destruction procedures take place either at your site or at our secure facility in Sparks, NV," the company's website states. "This decision is yours to make based on cost and convenience. In either situation, the hard drive will be destroyed by shredding." Nowhere did the Washington Free Beacon article offer any evidence that the services provided by American Document Destruction, Inc. to the Clinton campaign involved the destruction of hard drives or data from the private server she used while serving as Secretary of State. In fact, the article didn't even provide any evidence that the services involved the destruction of hard drives at all (rather than paper documents). It simply noted that the Clinton campaign paid American Document Destruction, Inc. an amount that would have covered the costs of destroying 14 hard drives or shredding 37.4 cubic feet of paper (or, presumably, some combination of the two). A follow-up article from another news outlet reported that Clinton's campaign also paid $50 to Shredco, a company that provides safe disposal of paper documents. It's extremely unlikely that either of these companies were involved in destroying material related to Clinton's use of a private email server for several reasons. First, the expenditures were openly reported to the Federal Election Commission, an unlikely move for a campaign furtively involved in destroying evidence related to a federal investigation. Second, anyone seeking to destroy sensitive information related to a high-level federal investigation probably wouldn't trust the task to businesses that charged only a few hundred dollars for the service, rather than to much more expensive (and presumably more private and secure) firms. Moreover, even though Bernie Sanders' campaign wasn't embroiled in an email controversy, his campaign paid nearly three times as much as Clinton's did for similar services. Former Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz also contracted for shredding services in the same timeframe. Paying for data destruction services is hardly suspect for an organization that processes thousands of donations each month, as the Hillary Clinton campaign does. Personal information from donors (such as credit card numbers) would, if printed or stored on hard drives, need to be securely destroyed to protect those donors. Given Bernie Sanders' repeated insistence that the average donation made to his campaign is $27, it seems reasonable that his organization would also be contracting for similar services and paying for a higher volume of shreddable transactions than the Clinton campaign. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.