id
stringlengths 4
7
| query
stringlengths 166
33.3k
| answer
stringclasses 3
values | choices
sequencelengths 3
3
| gold
int64 0
2
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
FMD2100 | 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 Google Remove Photos of Bill Clinton with Jeffrey Epstein from Search Results? Claim summaries: Did Google also "scrub" these photos from Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, and Duck Duck Go?
contextual information: In July 2019, registered sex offender and hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on charges related to the sex trafficking of minors. In addition to the severity of the alleged crimes, Epstein's arrest made headlines due to his connections to well-known public figures and politicians, including President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton. The news of Epstein's arrest sent political partisans into overdrive as they attempted to demonstrate that politicians on their side were less involved with Epstein than those on the other side. When images of President Trump with Epstein were published by news outlets and circulated on social media, his defenders were upset that similar images of Bill Clinton with Epstein were not given equal prominence. This led to a rumor that Google was "scrubbing," "removing," or "deindexing" images of Clinton and Epstein together from search results as part of a cover-up to protect the Clintons. Twitter users Paul Sperry, Jack Murphy, and BNL News all claimed, without evidence, that images of Epstein and Clinton together had been removed from Google's search results, and their tweets were collectively shared thousands of times. These claims are without merit. The tweets provided no evidence that images of Clinton with Epstein could be found on Google prior to the latter's arrest in July 2019, nor any proof that Google had removed these alleged images from their search results in the aftermath of Epstein's incarceration. In fact, they provided no evidence that photographs of Clinton with Epstein even existed at all. Twitter user Robert Barnes inflated this rumor by claiming that while Google wouldn't show photographs of Epstein and Clinton together, such images were findable using other search engines, such as DuckDuckGo. This simply wasn't the case. We searched for images of Clinton together with Epstein on Google, Yahoo, Bing, DuckDuckGo, and Yandex. The results for all five of these search engines were similar, with none of them turning up a genuine photograph of Epstein together with Clinton. A spokesperson for Google told us that no images of Epstein or Clinton were removed from their search results and that the company did not make any manual changes to its algorithm to alter which images would be displayed for related searches. We also checked right-leaning websites such as Breitbart, the National Review, and the Daily Caller to see if they had published any pictures of this pair together, but yet again we came up empty-handed. Of course, the lack of pictures doesn't mean that Bill Clinton didn't have a friendly relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The former president reportedly took several trips on Epstein's private jet, and in 1995, Clinton and Epstein were both on the guest list for a "small dinner party" hosted by Revlon mogul Ron Perelman to raise funds for the Democratic National Convention. At the time this article was originally written, images of Clinton and Epstein together didn't turn up in searches on Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, or DuckDuckGo. That changed, however, after Snopes uncovered a photograph of Epstein and Clinton that was published in a 2003 print edition of Vanity Fair magazine. The claim that Google is censoring these images can further be debunked by examining the company's search results in the days following the publication of our article. On July 23, 2019, shortly after we published an image of Clinton with Epstein, it appeared on the front page of Google's search results. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2101 | 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 the Bush, Clinton, and Obama Funeral Party Trash Air Force One? Claim summaries: "Please return your seats to an upright position and clean up the kitchen and bathrooms."
contextual information: On December 6, 2018, an article was published by the WeAreTheLLOD website, part of the "Last Line of Defense" network of junk news sites, reporting that former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama trashed Air Force One after the funeral of former president George H.W. Bush. The article claimed that President Trump was gracious enough to loan his personal airplane to the Bush family to transport the deceased President George H.W. Bush back home to Kennebunkport, Maine. They invited all the other past presidents, including Barack Obama. In return, the grieving family allegedly showed their appreciation by leaving the plane a mess and vandalizing the bathroom and kitchen. This was not a genuine news article, as WeAreTheLLOD.com and the rest of the Last Line of Defense network have a long history of publishing misinformation. The article also included several obvious hints about its satirical nature. For example, the label "Dead People and Satire with Hot Green Chili" can be seen below the article's title. The website banner features the tagline "Information You Probably Shouldn't Trust," and the footer states that the site was paid for by the "liberal trolls of America." Additionally, all of the hyperlinks in this article lead to unrelated content. For instance, where the text references the alleged legal terms "hapneus corpum and juris prumidential," it links to a Google Translation page for the sentence: "Because they don't exist and are possibly the dumbest things ever conceived." Eagleton, Flagg. "BREAKING: Bush, Clinton, Obama Funeral Party Trashes Air Force One." WeAretheLLOD.com. December 6, 2018. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2102 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: (Want to get this briefing by email? Here’s the .) Good evening. Here’s the latest. 1. President Trump is marshaling the full power of his office to win support for the Republican bill to replace the Affordable Care Act. On Capitol Hill, the bill was approved by two House committees despite vociferous opposition from Democrats, health care providers and some conservatives. It goes to the Budget Committee next, before a final House vote that Speaker Paul Ryan, above, plans for the week of March 20. _____ 2. The administration is considering deep cuts to the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to fund its southern border security plan. The goal is to shift about $5 billion toward hiring agents for Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, infrastructure and building a wall. The three agencies in question have played roles in the Department of Homeland Security’s . 11 security architecture. Some agency veterans were befuddled by the news. _____ 3. The new head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, said in a TV appearance that carbon dioxide was not a primary contributor to global warming. That statement is at odds with the global scientific consensus on climate change. His remarks come as the Trump administration prepares to roll back President Barack Obama’s two signature global warming policies: a pair of sweeping regulations intended to curb carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles and power plant smokestacks. _____ 4. The United States is sending an additional 400 troops to Syria to help prepare for the looming fight for Raqqa, the capital of the Islamic State’s caliphate. The increase, which includes a team of Army Rangers and a Marine artillery unit that have already arrived in the country, appears to represent a of the number of American troops in the country. _____ 5. The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, moved to seize the moment after his organization released a new trove of classified information about the C. I. A. ’s cyberweaponry. Speaking from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has sought refuge since 2012, Mr. Assange presented himself as a defender of some of the biggest American technology companies against their own government. The C. I. A. responded by saying that any spying it does is restricted by law to foreigners and foreign countries, and described Mr. Assange as “not exactly a bastion of truth and integrity. †_____ 6. In a rare public disclosure, Fox News released a joint statement with a former contributor, Tamara Holder, about her report of sexual assault by a company executive. In late February, 21st Century Fox reached a settlement worth more than $2. 5 million with Ms. Holder, who said that she was assaulted at company headquarters two years ago. She said she struggled with whether to come forward with her claims. The company is still dealing with the fallout from the harassment scandal involving Roger Ailes. “I was told by agents and lawyers that if I opened up, I would forever be ‘toxic’ and my career would be over,†Ms. Holder said in an email. “I had to turn my fear into courage. †_____ 7. And in Texas, sexual assault accusations piled up while Baylor University made football its top priority. The victims, furious alumni and the authorities are seeking answers. One lawsuit claims there were 52 rapes from 2011 to 2014 — a period when the football program became a dominant force in the Big 12 conference. Collectively, the cases have become a cautionary parable for college athletics, one in which a Christian university seemed to lose sight of its core values in pursuit of football glory and protected gridiron heroes who preyed on women. _____ 8. We’re getting ready for St. Patrick’s Day, celebrated on March 17. So was Mr. Trump’s online store, which briefly stocked a $50 green “Make America Great Again†hat embroidered with a clover. The designers may have been thinking of the shamrock, often mistaken for a clover. The latter is not a symbol of Ireland. The hats have now disappeared from the website. _____ 9. Here’s a new category of TV show: “pastoral porn. †That’s how our writer described “Countryfile,†a wildly popular BBC documentary show that portrays the lifestyle and grassy valleys of the English countryside. The “quintessentially British†program moves at a leisurely clip, and doesn’t shy away from difficult topics such as dementia or domestic abuse. “A lot of television may be made with ratings in mind,†one of the show’s directors said. “That may be where they are getting it wrong, as far as I am concerned. †_____ 10. Finally, in 2017, identity is at the absolute center of our conversations about music. Here are 25 songs that show why. In the process, they show us where music is going. To celebrate the release of the Times Magazine Music Issue, we offer a curated playlist featuring Future, Kelela, Adele and more, with essays by Margo Jefferson, Wesley Morris, Angela Flournoy and others. Happy listening. _____ Photographs may appear out of order for some readers. Viewing this version of the briefing should help. Your Evening Briefing is posted at 6 p. m. Eastern. And don’t miss Your Morning Briefing, posted weekdays at 6 a. m. Eastern, and Your Weekend Briefing, posted at 6 a. m. Sundays. Want to look back? Here’s last night’s briefing. What did you like? What do you want to see here? Let us know at briefing@nytimes. com. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2103 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: In yet another example of Trump s inability to maintain even a slight bit of tact while representing America s interests overseas, the White House reportedly canceled plans to visit a historic landmark during his visit to Israel one of the nation s biggest tourist attractions. The reason: Trump wanted to land his helicopter directly on the ancient mountain fortress and was told no.President Donald Trump has canceled a planned visit and speech at the ancient mountain fortress of Masada in Israel after authorities told him that he could not land his helicopter on top of the UNESCO-listed site.Instead, Trump will now deliver a speech at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. It comes after an Israeli Air Force (IAF) regulation that prevents helicopters landing at the summit of the Masada site, according to Israel s Channel 2 broadcaster.Unlike former presidents who have made the trip, such as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, Trump declined to land the helicopter at a base of the historic site and then take the cable car up, preferring to cancel the visit altogether.The reasons not allowing helicopters near the 2,000-year-old ruins should be obvious: For starters, the dust and sand that characterize the mountaintop are extremely rough on helicopter motors. Secondly, the wind and sand kicked up by the powerful blades can destroy the ancient structures, costing archaeologists priceless artifacts. Avoiding those issues by simply getting in a cable car was apparently too much energy.It may be another sign that Trump is hoping to breeze past this trip while doing minimal work. Sources close to Trump say he is extremely upset about having to travel abroad for a multi-day trip to the Middle East and already begged his staff to cut the number of days he d be gone. Keen observers of Trump s habits might note that Trump will be missing at least two weekends during the trip, days he typically reserves for golfing at his various private courses.Trump s demands on his overseas guests have raised eyebrows before. Earlier this year, Trump created a stir in England when reports leaked that he had requested Queen Elizabeth pick him up in a golden chariot:The White House has made clear it regards the carriage procession down the Mall as an essential element of the itinerary for the visit currently planned for the second week of October, according to officials.The request frustrated royal planners who described the situation as a logistical and financial nightmare.It s unclear how Israelis will react to Trump s show of laziness during his trip. Already the country s mood toward Trump is souring after the president is said to have leaked classified information provided by Israeli intelligence services to the Russians. He hasn t even left the White House and already his trip is shaping up to be trouble.Featured image via Mark Wilson/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2104 | 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 Ukraine planning to legalize the production of pornography in order to generate funds for the military?" Claim summaries: Viral posts mischaracterized a legislative proposal to decriminalize pornography in the country.
contextual information: On Oct. 17, 2023, an account on X (formerly Twitter) posted a screenshot of what it alleged was an Aug. 19, 2023, headline about the Ukrainian government legalizing the production of pornography to help fund its military during the country's war with Russia. Snopes was unable to identify any website with this alleged headline, but it closely matched the framing of a story published that same day (Aug. 19) on the Russian state-backed media outlet RT. That story by RT referenced a real legislative proposal by a member of Ukraine's parliamentary body, Yaroslav Zhelezniak, to decriminalize pornography in the country. However, that measure is an attempt by supporters to limit the state's control over consensual sexual activity, not an effort to raise money for the country's military. Nowhere in the legislation is military funding mentioned, and it does not spell out how the proposed changes to the porn industry would drive more money for Ukraine's armed forces. Like many former Soviet Bloc countries, pornography is entirely illegal in Ukraine. In August 2023, however, Zhelezniak introduced the proposal titled (via Google Translate), "Draft Law on Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine on Ensuring Freedom from Interference in a Person's Private Life," to remove some restrictions on the production of porn specifically. As described by the Kyiv Independent, an English-language news outlet in Ukraine, producing and distributing pornography is currently illegal in Ukraine. Broad interpretations of the law mean that even sharing a nude photograph with a partner can land a person in jail. In 2023 alone, 699 cases have been opened over the distribution, sale, and production of pornography, not including cases of child pornography. In one case in July, a court in Poltava Oblast fined a woman almost $1,000 for sending two videos to her boyfriend. Meanwhile, in Sumy Oblast, a man was sentenced to three years in prison with one year of probation for sending intimate photos and videos via a dating website. Lawmakers and advocates say this has to change. In their view, the decades-old prohibition of pornography harms ordinary citizens by prosecuting them for consensual sexual content, wasting state resources in the process. Zhelezniak argued that current Ukrainian law prohibits the production and distribution of material that many Ukrainians already produce or engage with. He believes the law should do more to prevent people from sharing nude photos without consent by including additional legal penalties and protect individual adult content creators against abuse by law enforcement authorities by removing other legal penalties. Supporters say the current legal climate allows authorities to coerce people who produce adult content or perform on webcams. As Zhelezniak explained to the Kyiv Post in August 2023, one of the problems with the current legislation is that law enforcement officers, namely cyber police officers, correspond with users of pornographic platforms— for example, those who strip for clients on webcams. They pretend to be customers and then offer them cover for a price, Zhelezniak said. The proposal would add explicit protections against victims of revenge porn, reaffirm the illegality of child pornography and "extreme" pornography, and remove criminal penalties for the production and distribution of legal porn. The proposed legislation was in committee as of this writing. Nowhere in the draft law was military funding mentioned. An explanatory note attached to the bill, however, pointed out— in an apparent attempt to highlight the current system's alleged flaws— that the Ukrainian government spends money to prosecute models on the adult content creation platform OnlyFans using tax revenue it receives from the same site. In 2021, Ukraine implemented a so-called Google tax that levels a 20% tax on foreign corporations that provide services in Ukraine. That tax applies to London-based OnlyFans, despite the fact that, in some cases, it hosts content that is technically illegal in the country. The explanatory note mentions that surpluses in the government's annual budget generally go toward the Ukrainian military. It is plausible that such a law could provide funding to the armed forces, but that was not its intent. Additionally, the explanatory note argues that the government spends significant resources investigating and prosecuting cases against models generating revenue for OnlyFans and, by extension, Ukraine, as described in the Kyiv Independent. OnlyFans, one of the world's largest platforms for erotic content, has already generated more than Hr 34 million ($920,000) in tax revenue for Ukraine's state budget from value-added tax in the first six months of the year, Ukrainian lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak, who has been spearheading the latest effort to legalize porn, told the Kyiv Independent. It's stupid to collect taxes for that and say it's criminal at the same time, Zhelezniak said. If we decriminalize porn, it means less corruption and more taxes for the budget. The explanatory note also referenced an organization that allows Ukrainians to donate erotic photos to people who provide evidence of a donation to the armed forces of Ukraine— TerOnlyfans. That group is independent of the Ukrainian government. It was referenced only in the draft law's explanatory note, nowhere in the actual legislation. That section (via Google Translate) read: TerOnlyfans Adult pornography is widely available in Ukraine and most of its aspects do not cause public disturbance. On the contrary, such an approach usually causes positive public reaction and media coverage. For almost one and a half years of existence of the TerOnlyfans platform, volunteers collected about UAH 31.5 million in donations for the Armed Forces of Ukraine for erotic photo cards. Quotes from TerOnlyfans Executive Director Anastasia Kuchmenko were included in most news stories about the draft law, and that media focus seemingly contributed to the spread of false claims that the proposal to decriminalize the production of porn was connected to military funding. In reality, while the bill indeed proposed lighter restrictions on porn production, it did not call for the government to use revenue from that proposed change for its armed forces. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2105 | 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: Washington Redskins Predict Presidential Elections Claim summaries: Have the Washington Redskins home game results correctly predicted presidential election outcomes since 1936?
contextual information: Claim: The outcome of Washington Redskins home football games has correctly predicted the winner of every U.S. presidential election since 1936. OUTDATED Example: [Collected via e-mail, November 2012] Did you know....?? The Washington Redskins have proved to be a time-tested election predictor. In the previous 15elections, if the Washington Redskins have lost their last home game prior to the election, the incumbent party has lost the White House. When they have won, the incumbent has stayed in power. This election year, that deciding game takes place on Sunday, October 31 ... vs. Green Bay. Go Pack!!! Origins: Our desire to understand and assert some control over the world around us is often manifested by our attempts to find predictive signs that enable us to prognosticate events even when there is no seeming connection between predictor and event. Sometimes one natural phenomenon supposedly forecasts another, as in the belief that a groundhog's seeing his shadow on February 2 portends another six weeks of winter. In other instances the linkage is between affairs of mankind, as in the superstition that the winner of football's Super Bowl augurs that year's stock market performance (or vice-versa). groundhog Super Bowl One item of this ilk which gained currency in 2004 maintained that the results of the last game played at home by the NFL's Redskins (a football team based in the national capital, Washington, D.C.) before a U.S. presidential election foretold the winner of that contest. If the Redskins won their last home game before the election, the party that occupied the White House continued to hold it; if the Redskins lost that last home game, the challenger from the out-of-office party unseated the incumbent party. And up until that 2004 election, the Redskins indicator had a rather remarkable record: Since 1936, the earliest presidential election year in which the current Redskins franchise played under that team name, the team's results had currently predicted the outcome of 17 straight presidential contests. Reality finally trumped coincidence in 2004, however: Despite the Green Bay Packers' 28-14 defeat of the Redskins at the latter's home field on 31 October, presaging a victory for Democratic challenger John Kerry in upcoming the presidential election, two days later incumbent President George W. Bush was re-elected, breaking the Redskins' predictive pattern. The Redskins indicator failed again in 2012 as Washington suffered a 21-13 home loss at the hands of the Carolina Panthers on 4 November 2012, just two days before that year's election, but Republican nominee Mitt Romney failed to unseat incumbent president Barack Obama. defeat loss While we don't presume there is anything more behind the phenomenon than random correlation, the Redskins indicator can still boast an accuracy rate of 90% with 18 correct matches out of the last 20 elections: After stumbling in 2004, the Redskins' power as election predictors got back on track in 2008. In a Monday night game contested on 3 November 2008, the evening before Election Day, the Redskins were defeated at home, 23-6, by the Pittsburgh Steelers, a loss that foretold a change in party which would bring the Democratic candidate into the White House. The following day, the Democratic presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, defeated the Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, for the White House. defeated On 30 October 2000 the Washington Redskins lost a Monday night game at home to the Tennessee Titans, 27-21, presaging a loss for the incumbent Democratic party. Since President Bill Clinton had already been elected to the constitutionally-mandated maximum of two terms in office, the 7 November 2000 presidential election pitted Democratic Vice-President Al Gore against Republican Governor George W. Bush of Texas. In the closest (and most controversial) presidential election since 1876, Governor Bush gained the White House by the slim margin of five electoral votes, thereby fulfilling the Redskin prophecy. lost On 27 October 1996 the Washington Redskins defeated the Indianapolis Colts at home, 31-16, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Sure enough, in the 5 November 1996 general election, Democratic President Bill Clinton won re-election over his Republican challenger, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas. defeated On 1 November 1992 the Washington Redskins lost to the New York Giants at home, 24-7, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Republicans. As expected, in the 3 November 1992, Republican President George H. W. Bush lost his re-election bid to Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas. lost On 6 November 1988 the Washington Redskins edged the New Orleans Saints at home, 27-24, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. As President Ronald Reagan had already been elected twice, the 8 November 1988 election once again matched a sitting Vice-President, Republican George H. W. Bush, against a challenger, Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. True to form, Vice-President Bush emerged victorious. edged On 5 November 1984 the Washington Redskins bested the Atlanta Falcons in a Monday night home game, 27-14, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The next day, President Ronald Reagan handily defeated his Democratic challenger, former Vice-President and Senator Walter F. Mondale of Minnesota, winning re-election with an electoral vote landslide. bested On 2 November 1980 the Washington Redskins were trounced at home by the Minnesota Vikings, 39-14, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. As expected, on 4 November 1980 President Jimmy Carter failed in his re-election bid, losing to his Republican opponent, former California governor Ronald Reagan. trounced On 31 October 1976 the Washington Redskins were spooked by the Dallas Cowboys in a Halloween Day home game, losing 20-7 and predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. Two days later, on 2 November 1976, Democratic Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia unseated President Gerald Ford (who had been appointed Vice-President after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973 and became chief executive in 1974 after President Richard Nixon also resigned). spooked On 22 October 1972 the Washington Redskins edged the Dallas Cowboys, 24-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans. The 7 November 1972 election resulted in the electoral vote landslide re-election of President Richard Nixon over the Democratic nominee, Senator George McGovern of South Dakota. edged On 27 October 1968 the Washington Redskins lost a close game to the New York Giants, 13-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Democrats. Since President Lyndon B. Johnson had announced several months earlier that he would not seek another term as president, the November 1968 election was a contest between sitting Vice-President Hubert Humphrey and a former Vice-President, Republican Richard Nixon. In a mirror of the Redskins game, the Democrats lost in a close contest (the two candidates were separated by a slim 0.6% margin in the popular vote). lost On 25 October 1964 the Washington Redskins beat the Chicago Bears, 27-20, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. As predicted, on 3 November 1964 President Lyndon Johnson (who had ascended to the White House after the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963) won a landslide victory over Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. beat On 30 October 1960 the Washington Redskins were pasted at home by the Cleveland Browns, 31-10, predicting a loss for the incumbent Republicans. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had already served two terms, so Vice-President Richard Nixon took up the Republican mantle against Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts in the 8 November 1960 presidential election. Like the Redskins, the Republicans lost; unlike the Redskins, the Republicans made the contest a very close one. (Kennedy bested Nixon by a mere 0.2% margin in the popular vote.) pasted On 21 October 1956 the Washington Redskins soundly defeated the Cleveland Browns at home, 20-9, predicting a win for the incumbent Republicans on 6 November 1956. And, for the second straight election, the Republicans and their standard-bearer, Dwight D. Eisenhower, prevailed over the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. defeated On 2 November 1952 the Washington Redskins lost a squeaker to the Pittsburgh Steelers at home, 24-23, predicting a similar loss for the incumbent Democrats. President Harry S. Truman declined to run for re-election (he had already served eight years), leaving the field open for former Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson to stand against the Republican candidate, General Dwight D. Eisenhower. The Democrats' loss on 4 November 1952 was not nearly as close as the Redskins' had been. lost On 31 October 1948, the Washington Redskins walloped the Boston Yanks at home, 59-21, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, In one of the most stunning political upsets in U.S. history, President Harry S. Truman (who had assumed office in 1945 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died shortly after beginning his fourth term) defeated his Republican challenger, Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. walloped On 5 November 1944, the Washington Redskins trimmed the Cleveland Rams at home, 14-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. And win the Democrats did, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt secured an unprecedented fourth term by defeating the Republican nominee, Thomas Dewey, on 7 November 1944. trimmed On 3 November 1940, the Washington Redskins thrashed the Pittsburgh Pirates (forebears of today's Steelers team) at home, 37-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Likewise, Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt became the first (and only) three-term president as he thrashed Republican challenger Wendell Willkie of New York (a former Democrat who had never held high elected office) on 5 November 1940. thrashed Going back to 1936 puts us beyond the beginnings of the Washington Redskins, as that year the Redskins franchise was still playing in Boston. Nonetheless, their knack for foretelling the outcome of presidential elections was already in place. On 1 November 1936 the Boston Redskins downed the Chicago Cardinals at Fenway Park, 13-10, predicting a win for the incumbent Democrats. Two days later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt won re-election over Republican Governor Alf Landon of Kansas. downed That is as far back as the streak goes. In 1932 the Washington Redskins were neither the Redskins nor a Washington team: they were the Boston Braves, and they played in Braves Field, which they shared with the National League baseball team of the same name. On 6 November 1932 they won at home against the Staten Island Stapletons, 19-6, a result that should have foretold a presidential victory for the incumbent Republican party. Neither the Redskins' team name nor their predictive powers were yet evident, however, as President Herbert Hoover lost to his Democratic challenger, Governor Franklin Delano Roosevelt of New York, on 8 November 1932. won Sightings: This Redskins home game election predictor was mentioned in an episode of the AMC television drama Mad Men ("The Wheel," original air date 18 October 2007): Last updated: 7 November 2012 | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2106 | 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 Biden From the Same Scranton as 'The Office'? Claim summaries: And is the home of world's most famous fictional paper company real?
contextual information: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. Throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden frequently referred to his roots in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Some social media users questioned whether this was the same "Scranton" from the U.S. sitcom "The Office" and whether Scranton was indeed a real American city. Meanwhile, Biden's political rival, U.S. President Donald Trump, accused Biden of exaggerating his connections to the small Pennsylvania city. This topic arose once again during the final presidential debate of 2020. Twice during the debate, Biden mentioned his small-town roots while discussing middle-class families. Here are transcripts from these two moments: "Where I come from, in Scranton and Claymont, the people don't live off the stock market. This isn't about me. There's a reason why he's bringing up all this malarkey. There's a reason for it. He doesn't want to talk about the substantive issues. It's not about his family and my family. It's about your family, and your family's hurting badly. If you're making less than, if you're a middle-class | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2107 | 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 Warned of 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 |
FMD2108 | 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 this video depict refugees stealing from a coffee shop in Spain? Claim summaries: A video purportedly showing refugees looting a caf in Spain actually captures an incident from 2015 involving students at a university in South Africa.
contextual information: Another video seemingly intended to malign refugees began to spread online in August 2018. This video purportedly showed a group of dark-skinned individuals smashing glass cases and stealing food from a small café. The video was captioned "Refugees Welcome to Spain," an apparent nod to the "Refugees Welcome" sign that had been hung on Madrid City Hall a few years prior. However, this video does not feature refugees, was not recorded in Spain, and does not depict a recent incident. The footage was actually taken in a cafeteria at Tshwane University of Technology in Pretoria, South Africa, in November 2015. At that time, students at several South African universities were engaged in protests against fee hikes and inadequate funding. The South African Independent Online (IOL) news outlet reported that 16 protesting students at two Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) campuses were arrested for the incident depicted in this video and were released the following day. The Gencor Hall, the main exam center at the South campus, along with the information center and two security vehicles, were torched. The protests took an ugly turn when students vandalized a cafeteria at the South campus. That same day, police arrested 16 students in connection with the violence but released them a day later. South African History Online provided context for the student protest: student protests at public universities and colleges over financial exclusions speak directly to the issue of inadequate governmental and other funding for education in South Africa. An estimated R900 million per annum for student funding is needed for TUT to function as an institution that still serves qualifying students requiring financial aid. NSFAS, a loan and bursary scheme the government introduced in 1999 to provide financially disadvantaged matrics access to university education, offers only a portion of this amount to students who need financial aid at TUT. For example, in 2014, the state scheme funded half of the university students who qualified for its loans and bursaries at TUT. Despite obtaining an additional allocation of R1 billion for that year, NSFAS was still unable to fund an estimated 10,000 students across TUT's campuses who needed and qualified for financial aid in 2014, of which R270 million was allocated for TUT. In 2015, the situation worsened as the NSFAS allocation excluded that portion. The 2015 SRC estimated that over 20,000 returning students across the university's six campus regions were excluded that year. Many of these students had been funded by NSFAS in 2014 but were left out in 2015 and were not allowed to register without an upfront payment; they were also barred from receiving their results without settling their debt. Students at institutions including the Vaal University of Technology, the University of Johannesburg, the University of Venda, and Walter Sisulu University faced similar issues around the same time. Academic activities at the university were suspended for the remainder of the school year after the protests turned violent in November 2015. YouTuber Arphalia Meyer contemporaneously posted a series of videos of the protesters looting the campus, with the video that formed the basis of the later viral "Refugees Welcome to Spain" clip being uploaded on 23 November 2015. That original video was accompanied by the caption "Security cam footage of the mob looting Kantina, the tuck shop on campus at TUT PTA. It's clear enough that this was premeditated and they are no strangers to it." This footage was taken at a university in South Africa and shows a group of students vandalizing a cafeteria amidst protests in 2015 against inadequate school funding. It has nothing to do with Spain or refugees, and it was nearly three years old when it was re-captioned and circulated online. South African History Online. "Student Protests at Tshwane University of Technology -- Timeline." Retrieved 16 August 2018. El Pais. "'Refugees Welcome,' Reads Sign on Madrid City Hall." 8 September 2015. Makhetha, Tankiso. "Two TUT Campuses Shut Down." IOL. 24 November 2015. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2109 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WASHINGTON — Donald J. Trump’s choice for White House budget director failed to pay more than $15, 000 in payroll taxes for a household employee, he admitted in a statement to the Senate Budget Committee, the sort of tax compliance issue that has derailed cabinet nominees in the past. In a questionnaire provided to the committee, Representative Mick Mulvaney, a conservative from South Carolina and vocal proponent of fiscal restraint noted, “I have come to learn during the confirmation review process that I failed to pay FICA and federal and state unemployment taxes on a household employee for the years . †Mr. Mulvaney said he had subsequently paid more than $15, 000 in taxes and awaits the state tax bill, as well as penalties and interests. His confirmation hearing before the committee is scheduled for Jan. 24. The employee was a babysitter hired when Mr. Mulvaney and his wife had triplets in 2000. Attempts to reach Mr. Mulvaney’s office for comment were not successful. A spokesman for the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Senator Michael B. Enzi, Republican of Wyoming, said he would have no immediate comment. Mr. Mulvaney will almost certainly be asked about the issue at his hearing, and Republicans on the committee are most likely aware of its existence. The situation is similar to that of former Senator Tom Daschle, who in 2009 was forced to withdraw his nomination as President Obama’s choice to lead the Health and Human Services Department. During Mr. Daschle’s confirmation process, it was revealed that he had paid roughly $140, 000 in back taxes related to a car and driver provided to him by a former employer, and to some consulting income. Senator John Cornyn of Texas, who is now the Republican in the Senate, said at the time that he would not support Mr. Daschle’s nomination, calling his tax issue “a little too much to swallow. †Mr. Daschle’s withdrawal came two weeks after Timothy F. Geithner, Mr. Obama’s first Treasury secretary, was nearly knocked out with his announcement that he had failed to pay $25, 000 in payroll taxes while working at the International Monetary Fund. In a statement, John Czwartacki, a spokesman for the Trump transition team, said: “Nobody is more qualified and more prepared to rein in Washington spending and fight for taxpayers than Mick Mulvaney. Congressman Mulvaney raised the issue surrounding the care of his premature triplets immediately upon being tapped for this position, and has taken the appropriate measures. The administration fully stands behind Representative Mulvaney. †Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said in a statement: “Senator Tom Daschle did the same thing and Republicans insisted that that disqualified him from becoming H. H. S. secretary. We say to our colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle, What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If Tom Daschle couldn’t become a cabinet member for not paying taxes for a household employee, the same standard ought to apply to Mick Mulvaney. †Two potential attorneys general under President Bill Clinton — Zoe E. Baird and Kimba Wood — lost their chances to become the first women to hold that office their nominations were pulled after revelations of nanny issues. The revelation of Mr. Mulvaney’s tax issue will test the Senate, which has greeted tax issues of past nominees with bipartisan denunciations. The process of confirming Mr. Trump’s nominees has quickly been somewhat stymied because of a slow vetting process. Several hearings were delayed because the nominees had not been cleared by the agency charged with unraveling potential conflicts of interest. Nominees undergo a rigorous screening by the F. B. I. and must clear the Office of Government Ethics to unravel any potential conflicts of interest that could present future legal problems. What is more, many committees have their own screening process. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2110 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: President Donald Trump on Thursday tapped Fed Governor Jerome Powell to become head of the U.S. central bank, breaking with precedent by denying Janet Yellen a second term but signaling a continuation of her cautious monetary policies. Powell, 64, a lawyer and investment banker appointed to the Fed board in 2012 by then-President Barack Obama, emerged as Trump’s choice from a slate of possible nominees that included Yellen and others who may have pursued a sharp policy shift. In an announcement at the White House, Trump described the soft-spoken Powell as a smart and committed leader who would build on Yellen’s achievements in steering the U.S. economy after the recovery from the 2007-2009 financial crisis. “If we are to sustain all this progress, our economy requires sound monetary policy and prudent oversight,†Trump said as Powell looked on. “We need strong and steady leadership at the U.S. Federal Reserve ... He will provide exactly that.†Powell has worked alongside Yellen for the past five years, backing her direction on monetary policy and, in recent years, sharing her concerns that weak inflation justified a continued cautious approach to raising interest rates. Yellen’s four-year term as Fed chief ends in early February 2018. She will be the first U.S. central bank chief not to be renominated to a second term since 1979. Trump on Thursday lauded Yellen’s stewardship but did not say why he decided to pass her over for another term. The Republican president said he was impressed by Powell’s experience in the private-sector and “real-world perspective†to government. “He understands what it takes for our economy to grow,†Trump said. Powell, who in the last 25 years has done a prototypical Washington circuit of government, private, and think tank jobs, pledged to be attuned to emerging financial risks and the impact the Fed has on average Americans. He will take over an economy that has been expanding for more than eight years and one that boasts an unemployment rate at more than a 16-1/2-year low. “Monetary policy decisions matter for American families and communities. I strongly share that sense of mission and am committed to making decisions with objectivity and based on the best available evidence,†Powell said in brief remarks after Trump’s announcement. His nomination now goes to the Republican-controlled Senate for confirmation. “I’m encouraged by President Trump’s choice,†Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement that pledged “timely†consideration of the nomination. There was little apparent market reaction to Powell’s nomination, which had been expected. Investors were largely focused on the release of details of a Republican plan to broadly change the U.S. tax code. By setting benchmark short-term interest rates, the Fed broadly influences borrowing and lending conditions in the economy. Since the crisis, the central bank has gained more power over the financial sector, while becoming more concerned about issues like income inequality. Yellen, a Fed veteran who has served at all levels of the sprawling central bank system, said in a written statement that she would work with Powell “to ensure a smooth transition.†Trump’s decision, after a broad and very public search, offers what analysts said was a classic compromise, allowing him to select his own Fed chief while getting continuity with the policies of the Yellen-run central bank. “The kernel of what this boiled down to is that in selecting Powell, (Trump) has all but selected Yellen,†said Sarah Binder, a political science professor at George Washington University and author of a recent book on Fed politics. “There is not really much daylight, if any.†In June, Powell laid out both a defense of the Fed’s gradualist path and a critique of those, including some of his competitors for the Fed job, who argued the central bank had increased the risk of high inflation and other problems. Trump on several occasions has said he would prefer rates to stay low, a position apparently at odds with some of those who were on his short list, particularly Stanford University economist John Taylor and former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh. Top White House economic adviser Gary Cohn also was a contender. Powell has been a reliable supporter of the consensus forged by Yellen on the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee, and likely will be seen as a less risky choice with the economy growing solidly and U.S. stock markets near record highs. The Fed has raised rates twice this year and is widely expected to do so again next month. But Powell has gone further than his colleagues in calling to relax some of the stricter regulations imposed after the crisis, also important to Trump. Powell can now pursue that end along with Trump appointee Randal Quarles, the Fed’s new vice chair for supervision. Though he will be the first Fed chief since the late 1970s without an advanced degree in economics, Powell brings market insights, Fed board experience and Republican ties that analysts say will likely make for a smooth confirmation and transition. Under President George H.W. Bush, Powell oversaw policy on financial institutions and debt markets as an undersecretary of the Treasury. From 1997 to 2005 he was a partner at the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm, and focused on public debt dynamics while at the Bipartisan Policy Center think tank. Yellen is entitled to remain as a Fed governor until 2024, though previous central bank chiefs have traditionally not stayed once a successor was in place. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2111 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The head of the Northern Irish party which props up the British government spoke to Prime Minister Theresa May on Monday shortly after telling supporters she would not allow a Brexit deal that creates regulatory divergence between the region and Britain. Democratic Unionist Party leader Arlene Foster spoke to May by phone shortly after her statement in Belfast, a party source told Reuters. The source declined to reveal the content of the call, but said the DUP was in continuing contact with May. May agreed on Monday to keep Northern Ireland in regulatory alignment with the European Union after Brexit, Irish government sources said, creating the possibility of divergence between regulations in Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2112 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: President Donald Trump has added a veteran Washington lawyer to the team representing him in the investigations of possible collusion by the Trump campaign with Russia, including the criminal probe being led by special counsel Robert Mueller. John Dowd, who has represented key figures in a variety white-collar criminal matters and investigations, has joined the president’s defense team led by New York lawyer Marc Kasowitz, Mark Corallo, a spokesman for the team, said on Friday. Another well-known white-collar Washington lawyer will likely join the team shortly, according to a person familiar with the matter. Dowd, 76, represented U.S. Senator John McCain on congressional ethics charges in the “Keating Five†banking scandal in the late 1980s and early 1990s. McCain was cleared in the matter. In 1989, Dowd’s investigation on behalf of Major League Baseball led to former Hall of Famer Pete Rose being banned from the sport for betting on games while he was manager of the Cincinnati Reds. Dowd also defended Galleon Group hedge fund founder Raj Rajaratnam in a 2011 trial brought by federal prosecutors in New York over insider trading. Rajaratnam was found guilty and sentenced to 11 years in prison. Earlier in his career, Dowd served in the U.S. Marine Corps and was part of a U.S. Department of Justice organized crime unit. He went into private practice in 1978. He worked for many years at the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, retiring in 2015. Along with Kasowitz and Dowd, the other lawyers on Trump’s team so far are Jay Sekulow, a conservative activist with a radio call-in show, and Michael Bowe, a longtime partner in Kasowitz’s firm. Mueller is investigating possible ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government, which U.S. officials have said meddled in the 2016 election. Russia has denied such interference. The White House has denied any collusion with Moscow. The special counsel also is looking into whether Trump has sought to obstruct the investigation, a person familiar with the inquiry said on Thursday. Former FBI Director James Comey testified earlier this month that Trump asked him to drop the bureau’s investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn. The Senate and House Intelligence Committees are also investigating possible ties between Russia and the Trump campaign. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2113 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: MOSCOW — A shipment of Kalashnikov rifles, popularly known as was destined for the United States when it was stopped and quickly rerouted to Venezuela. Washington had just slapped Moscow with sanctions over the Ukraine crisis, and the Russian gun maker Kalashnikov Kontsern suddenly found one of its biggest markets off limits. Without access to the ready buyers among American weapons enthusiasts, Kalashnikov had to change its strategy, an increasingly common challenge for Russian companies after the imposition of sanctions. In the two years that followed, Kalashnikov diversified into new product lines, slashed jobs and made over its brand. And the rifle — long the weapon of choice for militaries and militant groups and the world’s most widely used firearm — was pitched instead to hobbyists and hunters in Russia. That new strategy appears to be yielding results. As Kalashnikov steps into the void left by American competitors in its home market, it is on track to turn a profit this year, bolstered in part by a weaker currency. “They started paying attention to clients,†said Dmitry S. Balyasov, a lawyer and shooting enthusiast who was patronizing a firing range outside of Moscow. “They have a contemporary style for selling a product,†Mr. Balyasov said, clutching a legal, civilian version of the weapon. For the company behind the weapon, the shift from serving conflict to serving consumers has been stark. The company owns the original license to rifles, colloquially known as — a name derived from the Russian word for automatic and the surname of the inventor, Lt. Gen. Mikhail T. Kalashnikov, as well as the year the prototype appeared. In the Soviet era, Kalashnikov’s main rifle factory, called the Izhevsk Machine Works, was a military enterprise that stamped out guns in tremendous quantities with sales an afterthought. rifles are ubiquitous in conflict zones. More than 100 million have been sold, including the countless knockoffs the rifle has inspired from China and elsewhere. The chunky guns, with their oversize banana clips, are legendarily rugged, and can remain in armories for decades, limiting sales of new weapons. With the military market largely saturated, Kalashnikov became increasingly dependent on civilian weapons sales. The civilian versions shoot only once with each trigger squeeze, with no option to switch to full automatic as in the military rifle. Before the sanctions, Kalashnikov’s plan for expansion focused on the United States, where gun ownership laws are more lenient than in many other countries. Though Russian weapons make up a tiny piece of the United States market, sales of its civilian rifles and shotguns branded as Saiga and Baikal increased at a faster pace than the overall market. By 2013, the United States accounted for about 40 percent of the company’s total gun sales, roughly equivalent to the volume bought by the Russian military, where every soldier is equipped with one. American sanctions slammed the door on the expansion plan. The sanctions in mid 2014 took direct aim at Rostec, the military industrial conglomerate that holds a 51 percent stake in Kalashnikov. They forced the gun maker to take a hard look at its business. “We are moving from iron to intellect,†said Vasily Brovko, the director of strategy and communications for Rostec. It thinned its ranks of middle managers at the Izhevsk factory in 2015, and diversified this year by buying companies that make motorboats and surveillance drones. While Kalashnikov does not break out sales receipts from its various divisions, it intends for firearms and clothing to make up about 80 percent of earnings by 2020, with motorboat and drone sales accounting for the rest. A clothing line is being unveiled in September, and the company plans to open 60 retail stores in Russia by the end of the year, selling clothes and rifles. It also introduced a marketing campaign, with a new logo — a stylized letter K, with a curved ammunition magazine as one of the arms — and a slogan, “Kalashnikov: Real. Reliable. †“Kalashnikov is a global brand,†Vladimir Dmitriev, the company’s chief of marketing, said, likening Kalashnikov to Ferrari or Caterpillar, companies that sell clothing as a sideline to capitalize on brand recognition. “We are certainly justified in thinking that clothes and souvenirs with our symbols will be in demand, as much as our primary products. †In Russia, Kalashnikov must navigate a different environment than in the United States. Russian consumers can buy a firearm only with a police permit. Potential buyers must have no criminal record, a diploma from a gun safety course and a medical certificate that clears them of any mental illness. With few exceptions, civilians are not allowed to own pistols. Kalashnikov is playing to patriotic ideals. As part of a marketing effort, the company erected a stand festooned with balloons promoting the rifle in Moscow’s Gorky Park on May 9, Victory Day, the holiday commemorating the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945. The type of display — one associating itself with the Russian government and army — is a contrast to the United States, where antigovernment sentiment is strong among the public. The company is showing signs of improvement. It says it expects to report a profit of 2. 1 billion rubles, or about $33 million, when 2015 results are published this month, compared with a loss of 340 million rubles in 2014. It now sells fewer guns, but makes more money on each. But the biggest boost for Kalashnikov comes from factors beyond its control. Russia is a major oil exporter, and weak crude prices coupled with the sanctions helped cut the value of its currency. With most of its costs priced in rubles, Kalashnikov products became far more competitive with imported firearms. “We are talking about the reversal of the Dutch disease, which Russia has been suffering,†Vladimir Osakovsky, chief economist for Russia at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, said. Dutch disease refers to the impact energy prices tend to have on an country’s currency, pushing it higher and hurting domestic companies by making their exports look comparatively expensive. Whether the growth is sustainable or the product of favorable currency winds will depend on Kalashnikov’s ground campaign. As part its broad new marketing effort, the company now sends representatives to gun stores across Russia to promote its products. At the Hunting Club gun shop in Moscow’s suburbs, Kalashnikov has provided two window displays exclusively for its rifles, and racks and shelves to sell branded and shoulder patches. “The idea is to surround the customer with the brand, so he is not tempted to spend money anywhere else,†Mr. Brovko, the Rostec strategist, said. With the help of the currency tailwinds, demand for Kalashnikov’s shotguns and rifles at the shop has outpaced that for guns made by its rivals, like Beretta of Italy, Sauer of Germany and Winchester of the United States, according to Aleksei V. Lapshin, the owner of the Hunting Club. Customers have also been pleased with the range of special options, including different materials for the rifle exterior, he said. “It’s a very modern approach,†he said. “Some people want black plastic, some people want beechwood, some people want walnut. †“No two comrades have the same taste. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2114 | 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: Which political party is better at decreasing the number of abortions? Claim summaries: It is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement.
contextual information: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here In September 2020, social media users began circulating a text meme charting the decrease in abortion rates in the U.S. during previous presidential administrations, attributing the greater drop in those rates during Democratic administrations to a difference in approach (i.e., making it illegal vs. making it unnecessary): As we noted in an earlier article on a similar topic, following the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that protected a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction, the abortion rate rose immediately afterward until it peaked in the 1980s, and it has fairly consistently declined since that peak through presidential administrations of both parties: article Following nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973, the total number, rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 1544 years), and ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 live births) of reported abortions increased rapidly, reaching the highest levels in the 1980s before decreasing at a slow yet steady pace. Although it is true that the abortion rate has experienced greater declines during Democratic administrations than Republican ones, we can't draw any definitive conclusion that, as the meme tries to suggest, this difference is primarily due to varying approaches by the two main political parties. The simple idea presented by the meme has a number of flaws, chief among them that political factors that might influence the abortion rate (e.g., policies, legislation, judicial appointments and rulings) do not neatly conform to presidential terms of office -- what takes place during one administration generally continues to have an effect throughout subsequent administrations. As well, events occurring at state and local levels (not necessarily directly tied to federal actions) can have a substantial impact on the availability and prevalence of abortions. More important, though, is that we cannot definitively determine to what extent political factors influence the abortion rate. As the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion-rights research organization) observed, recent declines in the abortion rate appear to have been driven not primarily by abortion restrictions but by a broader decline in pregnancies: observed Abortion restrictions target either individuals ability to access the procedure (such as by imposing coercive waiting periods and counseling requirements) or providers ability to offer it (such as through unnecessary and intentionally burdensome regulations). Any one of these restrictions could result in some people being forced to continue pregnancies they were seeking to end; this could, in theory, lower the abortion rate. With the available evidence, it is impossible to pinpoint exactly which factors drove recent declines, and to what degree. However, previous Guttmacher analyses have documented that abortion restrictions, while incredibly harmful at an individual level, were not the main driver of national declines in the abortion rate ... Rather, the decline in abortions appears to be part of a broader decline in pregnancies, as evidenced by fewer births over the same period. What's driving that decline in pregnancies, then? We don't know that for sure, either, but likely a combination of social, cultural, economic, medical, and political factors: combination Experts say the decline isnt due to a single cause, but rather a combination of several factors, including changing economics, delays in childbirth by women pursuing jobs and education, the greater availability of contraception, and a decline in teen pregnancies. The trend seen in the United States is also seen in much of the developed world, including Western Europe, said Dr. John Rowe, a professor at Columbia Universitys Mailman School of Public Health. One important factor driving this is the changing roles of women in society, Rowe said. In general women are getting married later in life, he explained. They are leaving the home and launching their families later. [Dr. Helen Kim, an associate professor at Northwestern Universitys Feinberg School of Medicine] said the concept of the ideal family size may be changing. There are shifts where having smaller families is a trend, she added. I cant speak on this as a sociologist, but this is what Ive seen among my peers and colleagues. One of the biggest factors is the decline in teen pregnancies, Rowe said. Thats good news ... And that makes a huge difference to their lives. The Guttmacher Institute posited a similar mix of factors to explain the decline in the abortion rate: Because both abortions and births [have] declined, it is clear that there were fewer pregnancies overall in the United States ... The big question is why. One possible contributing factor is contraceptive access and use. Since 2011, contraception has become more accessible, as most private health insurance plans are now required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to cover contraceptives without out-of-pocket costs. In addition, thanks to expansions in Medicaid and private insurance coverage under the ACA, the proportion of women aged 1544 nationwide who were uninsured dropped more than 40% between 2013 and 2017. There is evidence that use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods -- specifically IUDs and implants -- increased through at least 2014, especially among women in their early 20s, a population that accounts for a significant proportion of all abortions Another possible contributing factor might be a decline in sexual activity. Findings from one national survey suggest a long-term increase in the number of people in the United States -- mostly younger men -- reporting not having sex in the past year. Yet another possibility is that infertility is increasing in the United States, thereby reducing the chances of getting pregnant and subsequently seeking to obtain an abortion. More generally, there are a host of other potential factors that could be driving declines in pregnancy rates, from individuals evolving desires about whether and when to become parents to peoples changing economic and social circumstances. Finally, it is possible that ... there could have been an increase in self-managed abortions happening outside of medical facilities, which the census would be unable to capture. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also offered a combination of potential explanations for lower abortion rates: combination Multiple factors influence the incidence of abortion including the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health care services, including contraception. As we stated four years ago, "causation between the presidency and abortion rates [is] difficult to demonstrate in any case, because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement." That observation remains true today. Carroll, Linda and Shamard Charles, M.D. "Americans Aren't Making Enough Babies to Replace Ourselves."
NBC News. 13 January 2019. Nash, Elizabeth and Joerg Dreweke. "The U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop: Once Again, State Abortion Restrictions Are Not the Main Driver."
Guttmacher Institute. 18 September 2019. Kasprak, Alex. "Abortion Rates Fall During Democratic Administrations and Rise During Republican Ones."
Snopes.com. 11 November 2016. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2115 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The next two weeks will determine whether Britain avoids further costly delays in giving business assurances of a smooth exit from the European Union and free trade in the future. Following is a timeline of critical meetings and explanation of the key decisions that need to be taken. British Prime Minister Theresa May wants the EU to open the second phase of Brexit negotiations, concerning relations after Britain s withdrawal on March 30, 2019. The EU will only do that if there is sufficient progress in agreeing divorce terms, notably on three key issues: a financial settlement, guaranteed rights for EU citizens in Britain and a soft border with Ireland. A deal on money is effectively done, EU officials say, and they are close on citizens rights, leaving Ireland the biggest headache outstanding. [nL8N1O06MU] [nL8N1O12A0] As part of the intricate choreography for a political deal, the EU set May an absolute deadline of Monday, Dec. 4, to provide new offers in time for the other EU leaders to approve a move to Phase 2 at a summit of the EU-27 on Friday, Dec. 15. May is pushing for a simultaneous, reciprocal guarantee from the EU of a soft transition and future trade deal, which she may use to show Britons what her compromises have secured. The EU wants to have firm British offers which the 27 can discuss before leaders commit. The result is some complex dance steps: Mon, Dec. 4 | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2116 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: What will Donald Trump do if he loses the elections in a week and a half from now, as most polls indicate?
He has already declared that he will recognize the results – but only if he wins.
That sounds like a joke. But it is far from being a joke.
Trump has already announced that the election is rigged. The dead are voting (and all the dead vote for Hillary Clinton). The polling station committees are corrupt. The polling machines forge the results.
No, that is not a joke. Not at all.
This is not a joke, because Trump represents tens of millions of Americans, who belong to the lower strata of the white population, which the white elite used to call “white trash”. In more polite language they are called “blue collar workers”, meaning manual workers, unlike the “white collar workers” who occupy the offices.
If the tens of millions of blue-collar voters refuse to recognize the election results, American democracy will be in danger. The United States may become a banana republic, like some of its southern neighbors, which have never enjoyed a stable democracy.
This problem exists in all modern nation-states with a sizable national minority. The lowest strata of the ruling people hates the minority. Members of the minority push them out of the lower jobs. And more importantly: the lower strata of the ruling majority have nothing to be proud of except for their belonging to the ruling people.
The German unemployed voted for Adolf Hitler, who promoted them to the “Herrenvolk” (master people) and the Aryan race. They gave him power, and Germany was razed to the ground.
The one and only Winston Churchill famously said that democracy is a bad system, but that all the other systems tried were worse.
As far as democracy is concerned, the United States was a model for the world. Already in its early days it attracted freedom-lovers everywhere. Almost 200 years ago, the French thinker, Alexis de Tocqueville, wrote a glowing report about the “Democratie en Amerique”.
My generation grew up in admiration of American democracy. We saw European democracy breaking down and sinking into the morass of fascism. We admired this young America, which saved Europe in two world wars, out of sheer idealism. The democratic America vanquished German Nazism and Japanese militarism, and later Soviet Bolshevism.
Our childish attitude gave way to a more mature view. We learned about the genocide of the native Americans and about slavery. We saw how America is seized from time to time by an attack of craziness, such as the witch hunt of Salem and the era of Joe McCarthy, who discovered a Communist under every bed.
But we also saw Martin Luther King, we saw the first black President, and now we are probably about to see the first female President. All because of this miracle: American democracy.
And here come this man, Donald Trump, and tries to rip apart the delicate ties that bind American society together. He incites men against women, whites against blacks and hispanics, the rich against the destitute. He sows mutual hatred everywhere.
Perhaps the American people will get rid of this plague and send Trump back where he came from – television. Perhaps Trump will disappear like a bad dream, as did McCarthy and his spiritual forefathers.
Let’s hope. But there is also the opposite possibility: that Trump will cause a disaster never seen before: the downfall of democracy, the destruction of national cohesion, the breaking up into a thousand splinters.
Can this happen in Israel? Do we have an Israel a phenomenon that can be compared to the ascent of the American Trump? Is there an Israeli Trump?
Indeed, there is. But the Israeli Trump is a Trumpess.
She is called Miri Regev.
She resembles the original Trump in many ways. She challenges the Tel Aviv “old elites” as Trump incites against Washington. She incites Jewish citizens against Arab citizens. Orientals of eastern descent against Ashkenazis of European descent. The uncultured against the cultured. The poor against all others. She tears apart the delicate ties of Israeli society.
She is not the only one of her kind, of course. But she overshadows all the others.
After the elections for the 20 th Knesset, in March 2015, and the setting-up of the new government, Israel was overrun by a band of far-right politicians, like a pack of hungry wolves. Men and women without charm, without dignity, possessed by a ravenous hunger for power, for conspicuousness at any price, people out for their own personal interest and for nothing else. They compete with each other in the hunt for headlines and provocative actions.
At the starting line they were all equal – ambitious, unlikable, uninhibited. But gradually, Miri Regev overtakes all the others. All they can do, she can do better. For every headline grabbed by another, she can grab five. For every condemnation of another in the media, she gets ten.
Benyamin Netanyahu is a dwarf, but compared to this bunch he is a giant. In order to remain so, he appointed each of them to the job he or she is most unsuited for. Miri Regev, a rude, vulgar, primitive person became Minister of Culture and Sports.
Regev, 51, is a good-looking woman, daughter of immigrants from Morocco. She was born as Miri Siboni in Kiryat-Gat, a place for which I have deep feelings, because it was there that I was wounded in 1948. Then it was still an Arab village called Irak-al-Nabshiyeh, and my life was saved by four soldiers, one of whom was called Siboni (no connection).
For many years, Regev served in the army as a public relations officer, rising to the rank of Colonel. Seems that one day she decided to do public relations for herself, rather than for others.
Since her first day as Minister of Culture, she has supplied the media with a steady stream of scandals and provocations. Thus she gradually overtakes all her competitors in the Likud leadership. They just cannot compete with her energy and inventiveness.
She declared proudly that she sees her job as the elimination of all anti-Likud people from the cultural arena – after all, “that’s what the Likud was elected for.”
All over the world, governments subsidize cultural institutions and creative people, convinced that culture is a vital national asset. When Charles de Gaulle was the President of France, he was once approached by his police chiefs with the request to issue an arrest warrant for the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, because of his support for the Algerian freedom fighters. De Gaulle refused and said: “Sartre too is France!”
Well, Regev is no de Gaulle. She threatens to withdraw government subsidies from any institution that publicly opposes the policy of the right-wing government. She demanded the cancelation of the program of an Arab rapper who read from the works of Mahmoud Darwish, the adored national poet of the Arab citizens and of the entire Arab world. She demanded that all theaters and orchestras perform in the settlements in the occupied territories, if they want to keep their subsidies.
This week she won a resounding victory when Habima, the “national theater”, agreed to perform in Kiryat-Arba, a nest of the most fanatical fascist settlers. Indeed, no day passes without news of some new exploit by Regev. Her colleagues explode with jealousy.
The basis of Israeli Trumpism and of Miri Regev’s career is the deep resentment of the Oriental – or Mizrahi – community. It is directed against the Ashkenazim, the Israelis of European descent. They are accused of treating the Orientals with disdain, calling them “the second Israel”.
Since those recruits of Moroccan descent saved my life near the birthplace of Miri Regev, I have written many words about the tragedy of Mizrahi immigration, a tragedy of which I was an eye-witness from the first moment. Many injustices were committed by the established Jewish population against the new immigrants, mostly without bad intentions. But the greatest sin of all is rarely mentioned.
Every community need a sense of pride, based on its past achievements. The pride was taken away from the Mizrahim, who arrived in the country after the 1948 war. They were treated as people devoid of culture, without a past, “cave-dwellers from the Atlas mountains”.
This attitude was a part of the contempt for Arab culture, a contempt deeply embedded in the Zionist movement. Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, the right-wing Zionist leader and forefather of the Likud party, wrote in his time an article entitled “The East”, in which he expressed his disdain for Oriental culture, Jewish and Arab alike, because of its religiosity and inability to separate between state and religion – a barrier to any human progress, according to him. This article is rarely mentioned nowadays.
The Oriental immigrants came to a country that was predominantly “secular”, non-religious and Western. It was also very anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. The new immigrants understood quickly that, in order to be accepted in Israeli society, they must get rid of their traditional-religious culture. They learned to distance themselves from everything Arab, such as their accent and their songs. Otherwise it would be difficult to become part of the country’s new society.
Before the birth of Zionism – a very European movement – there was no enmity between Jews and Muslims. Quite the contrary. When the Jews were expeled from Catholic Spain, many centuries ago, only a minority immigrated to anti-Semitic, Christian Europe. The vast majority went to Muslim lands and was received with open arms all over the Ottoman Empire.
Before that, in Muslim Spain, the Jews achieved their crowning glory, the “Golden Age”. They were integrated in all spheres of society and government and spoke Arabic. Many of their men of letters wrote Arabic and were admired by Muslims as well as Jews. Maimonides, perhaps the greatest of Sephardic Jews, wrote Arabic and was the personal physician of Saladin, the Muslim warrior who vanquished the Crusaders. The ancestors of these Crusaders had slaughtered Jew and Muslim alike when they conquered Jerusalem. Another great Mizrahi Jew, Saadia Gaon, translated the Torah into Arabic. And so on.
It would have been natural for Oriental Jews to take pride in this glorious past, as German Jews take pride in Heinrich Heine and French Jews in Marcel Proust. But the cultural climate in Israel compelled them to give up their heritage and pretend to admire solely the culture of the West. (Eastern singers were an exception – first as wedding performers and now as media stars. They became popular as “Mediterranean singers”.)
If Miri Regev were a cultured person, and not merely a Minister of Culture, she would have devoted her considerable energy to the revitalization of this culture and giving back pride to her community. But this does not really interest her. And there is another reason.
This Mizrahi culture is totally bound up with the Arab-Muslim culture. It cannot be mentioned without noticing the close relationship between the two for many centuries, during which Muslims and Jews worked together for the advancement of mankind, long before the world heard of Shakespeare or Goethe.
I have always believed that restoring pride was the duty of a new generation of peace-lovers that will arise from among the Mizrahi society. Lately, men and women from this community have reached key positions in the peace camp. I have high hopes.
They will have to fight the present culture minister – a minister who has nothing in common with culture, and a Mizrahi woman who has no Mizrahi roots.
I hope for a Jewish-Mizrahi revival in this country because it can advance Israeli-Arab peace and because it can strengthen again the loosened ties between the different communities in our state.
As a non-religious person I prefer the Mizrahi religiosity, which has always been moderate and tolerant, to the fanatical Zionist-religious camp that is predominantly Ashkenazi. I have always preferred Rabbi Ovadia Josef to the Rabbis Kook, father and son. I prefer Arie Der’I to Naftali Bennett.
I detest Donald Trump and Trumpism. I dislike Miri Regev and her culture. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2117 | 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 the Average American Gain 29 Pounds During Pandemic Lockdowns? Claim summaries: The number stems from a misreading of a 2021 online survey of just over 3,000 individuals.
contextual information: A June 2023 Twitter thread from Democratic presidential primary challenger Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that began with a video of him performing pushups also stated an allegedly science-based fact that the average American gained 29 pounds during the lockdowns of the early COVID-19 pandemic. There are several ways in which this statement is false. Twitter thread First, Kennedy misrepresented the findings of the survey he cited. Second, that survey even when read correctly does not properly address the question Kennedy claimed it addresses. And third, published clinical data suggest the pandemic did not have a significant overall effect on weight and, instead, followed a trend of an increase in the average weight of Americans that has existed since well before the pandemic. In an email to Snopes, Kennedy conceded that this critique was valid. "I appreciate you catching my mistake and alerting me," he wrote. The statistic Kennedy (partially) quoted comes from a 2021 survey conducted by the American Psychological Association. That study found that 42% of people gained unwanted weight during the pandemic, and within that subset of people the average weight gain was 29 pounds. 2021 survey APA's survey of U.S. adults, conducted in late February 2021 by The Harris Poll, shows that a majority of adults (61%) experienced undesired weight changesweight gain or losssince the pandemic started, with 42% reporting they gained more weight than they intended. Of those, they gained an average of 29 pounds (the median amount gained was 15 pounds) and 10% said they gained more than 50 pounds, the poll found. majority of adults (61%) experienced undesired weight changes When the pool of individuals you are looking at includes only people who reported gaining weight (and not, for example, the people who say they lost or maintained weight during the same period of time) the number is going to be significantly higher. Kennedy's claim relies on the notion that the only Americans that existed during the pandemic are those who gained weight. This same survey indicated that "18% of U.S. adults report undesired weight loss, with an average weight loss of 26 lbs." same survey In response to our question about his use of this data, Kennedy responded to Snopes by email stating that he was in error. "I made an error in describing 29 lbs as a national average," he wrote. The APA survey did not gather weight data on any individual. Instead these data stem from surveys carried out by the APA, Stress In America, that measure "attitudes and perceptions of stress among the general public". This particular survey, the Pandemic Anniversary Survey, was conducted roughly a year into the pandemic in February 2021. It had a sample size of just over 3,000 individuals: Stress In America sample size The Pandemic Anniversary Survey was conducted online within the United States by The Harris Poll on behalf of the American Psychological Association between Feb. 19 and 24, 2021, among 3,013 adults age 18+ who reside in the U.S. The survey questions were designed to identify perceptions of stress, not to quantify standardized measurements of weight. Reports of undesired weight gain, in this sort of study, are entirely self-reported. Even if used in good faith, such a survey would not be an appropriate gauge of actual trends of weight gain or loss in America. In contrast to the APA study and its 3,000 participants, a research paper published by the Epic Health Research Network (EHRN) analyzed anonymized medical data collected from nearly 20 million patients across America at multiple times before, at the onset of, and during the pandemic, as explained in the July 2021 publication: research paper These data come from Cosmos, a HIPAA Limited Data Set of more than 111 million patients. [...] Data are pooled from 128 healthcare organizations representing 640 hospitals that span 49 states and cover 19,573,285 patients. This includes 15,663,833 patients in the year prior to the pandemic and 14,922,615 patients over the course of the pandemic. Cosmos, its website says, is the "largest integrated database of clinical information in the United States." Composed of anonymized clinical records, the dataset is a product of a software company that manages medical records in many American hospitals. Epic Research is an arm of this collection of companies publishing papers based on their Cosmos dataset. says many American hospitals In the study, the researchers found that an almost equal number of individuals gained weight as lost weight during the pandemic: found We evaluated weight change for adults during the pandemic compared to weight change for adults in the year prior to the pandemic. A weight loss or gain of 2.5 pounds, which we define as a normal fluctuation or "no change," was most common, both pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. Nearly as many patients lost weight (35%) as gained weight (39%) during the pandemic. By utilizing data from before the pandemic, from the start of the pandemic, and from during the pandemic, the researchers were also able to compare rates of weight gain or loss year by year. As described in the study, the period of time from the onset of the pandemic into May 2021 brought slightly higher average body weight than the preceding time period, but this was in line with a national trend of increasing average weight: described The average adult weight over time has increased, as shown in Figure 3 [below]. The slight increase in the average adult weight during the pandemic period of less than one pound is consistent with the previous trend. Weight change patterns were similar regardless of age and sex. Their findings also put the extremity of Kennedy's claim in perspective. The clinical data indicates that only about 2% of individuals gained more than 27.5 pounds during the early pandemic: only about 2% Because no study actually says that the average American gained 29 pounds during the early pandemic, because the study used to reach that conclusion even if interpreted correctly is ill-suited for the purpose Kennedy used it, and because nationwide clinical data suggest otherwise, the claim is False. Alban, Chris, et al. Pandemic Pound Theories Don't Hold Weight. https://epicresearch.org/articles/pandemic-pound-theories-dont-hold-weight. Accessed 6 July 2023. Epic Cosmos. https://cosmos.epic.com/. Accessed 6 July 2023. Jennings, Katie. "The Billionaire Who Controls Your Medical Records." Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiejennings/2021/04/08/billionaire-judy-faulkner-epic-systems/. Accessed 6 July 2023. "One Year on: Unhealthy Weight Gains, Increased Drinking Reported by Americans Coping with Pandemic Stress." APA, https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2021/03/one-year-pandemic-stress. Accessed 6 July 2023. Slightly More Than 6 in 10 U.S. Adults (61%) Report Undesired Weight Change Since Start of Pandemic. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2021/03/march-weight-change. Accessed 6 July 2023. "Stress in America." APA, https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress. Accessed 6 July 2023. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2118 | 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: At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.
contextual information: A big part of President Barack Obama's first State of the Union speech on Jan. 27, 2010, focused on the economy.To set the stage, he said his predecessor was largely responsible for the country's fiscal shape.At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion, Obama said. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.We've checked several claims to this effect in the last year,most recently one by Obama adviser David Axelrod. Indeed, we found that the government was enjoying a surplus of about $236 billion circa 2001. Later, when Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported the deficit was over $1.2 trillion. A good chunk of the deficits racked up by the Bush administration came from tax cuts, the war in Iraq and actions that Bush and a Democratic Congress took to prop up the economy right before he left office.In the same report, the CBO projected a 10-year deficit of about $3.1 trillion. But Obama said $8 trillion, based on budget numbers published by the White House Office of Management and Budget shortly after Obama took office.Why the discrepancy? When we checked the similar claim by Axelrod, we spoke with Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition. He said it has to do with how the two offices estimate the future. The CBO bases its projections on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2010 and that a patch to fix the alternative minimum tax would expire, among other things. The White House does not; instead, it assumes that nothing changes in current law.So, Obama's overall point is correct that the government was enjoying a substantial surplus when Bush took office and had a big deficit when he departed; he's spot on about the surplus Bush began with. He's also correct about the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office. The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. So given that discussion, we'll take Obama down a notch to Mostly True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2119 | 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 Donald Trump 'Ordered' to Stay Away from Barbara Bush's Funeral? Claim summaries: According to the White House, the President did not attend the former First Lady's funeral to avoid creating a disruption.
contextual information: In late April 2018, an unsourced Facebook post reporting that U.S. President Donald Trump had been "ordered" not to attend former First Lady Barbara Bush's funeral on 21 April 2018 in Houston, Texas, was circulated on social media, prompting readers to ask if it was true: Barbara Bush, who was the mother of former president George W. Bush and former Florida governor Jeb Bush, as well as the wife of former President George H.W. Bush, passed away on 17 April 2018 at the age of 92. After a bitter 2016 presidential campaign in which candidate Donald Trump heavily criticized two of Barbara Bush's sons (as well as beating out Jeb Bush for the Republican nomination), the Bush family matriarch made it no secret that she was not a fan of Donald Trump. We uncovered no other reports that anyone from the Bush family "ordered" the sitting president not to attend Barbara Bush's memorial service. Instead, the White House released a statement to reporters saying Trump would not attend out of respect to avoid creating a disruption "due to added security." First Lady Melania Trump, however, will be in attendance, as will former presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and former first ladies Hillary Clinton, Laura Bush, and Michelle Obama (along with, of course, Barbara Bush's husband and sons). statement will be During the 2016 campaign, Barbara Bush didn't hold back in her critiques of then-candidate Donald Trump. In the course of a CNN interview, for example, she proclaimed that "[Trump] doesn't give many answers to how he would solve problems. He sort of makes faces and says insulting things ... He's said terrible things about women, terrible things about the military. I don't understand why people are for him, for that reason. I'm a woman ... I'm not crazy about what he says about women." In another interview with CBS, Bush again lambasted Trump for his comments about women and called him a "comedian" or a "showman": Surprised this didn't get shared more at the time. Maybe because back then so many thought he would inevitably lose and disappear. Barbara Bush unfiltered on Trump. "I don't know how women can vote" for him, she says. pic.twitter.com/IWK42SmGo7 pic.twitter.com/IWK42SmGo7 Elad Nehorai (@PopChassid) April 9, 2018 April 9, 2018 Although there was no love lost between President Trump and the Bush family, the BBC noted it's not unusual for sitting presidents to skip the funerals of former first ladies: BBC Of course, then-President Barack Obama didn't attend the funerals of Republican first ladies Nancy Reagan and Betty Ford. Neither did George W Bush attend the 2007 memorial services for Democrat Lady Bird Johnson. But Mr Trump and the Bushes are in the same party and a presidential gesture here could have soothed some raw wounds for Republicans that remain from the tumultuous 2016 campaign. Instead, Mr Trump will spend the weekend at his resort in Florida. Bush did express that he wanted President Trump to attend his own funeral, however: express Despite antipathy between the Bush family and President Donald Trump, the 41st president made clear he wanted America's current leader to be at the funeral, putting the institution of the presidency above personal animosities. Trump has confirmed he will attend the event, which follows a series of national disasters and tragedies and moments of public mourning that have caused critics to fault his behavior as short of that expected of a president. To his credit, Trump canceled what was certain to be a contentious news conference at the G20 summit in Argentina out of respect for Bush. He also sent one of the iconic blue-and-white 747 jets that serves as Air Force One when a president is aboard to Texas to carry Bush's casket. Associated Press. "Trump Will Skip Barbara Bush Funeral, Sending First Lady."
19 April 2018. KTRK-TV. "Some Details Released for Barbara Bush's Funeral."
20 April 2018. BBC News. "Barbara Bush Funeral: Donald Trump Not Attending 'Out of Respect.'"
20 April 2018. Friedmann, Sarah. "These Barbara Bush Quotes About Trump Are Still So Relevant for American Women."
Bustle. 17 April 2018. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2120 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: While the protest movement plotting to disrupt Donald Trump’s inauguration is largely attempting to portray itself as grassroots, in actuality professional activists are leading the charge. [A main protest coalition group calls itself DisruptJ20. The organization’s website does not say much about who is behind the group. DisruptJ20 “rejects all forms of domination and oppression, particularly those based on racism, poverty, gender and sexuality, organizes by consensus, and embraces a diversity of tactics,†the site reads. Claiming it stands for the vast majority of Americans, the group calls itself the “start of the resistance. We must take to the streets and protest, blockade, disrupt, intervene, sit in, walk out, rise up, and make more noise and good trouble than the establishment can bear. The parade must be stopped. †DisruptJ20 is planning a slew of actions aimed, as the group relates, at “disrupting the ceremonies. †According to the website, those actions include “spontaneous, unpermitted events,†an “unpermitted, anticapitalist march,†civil disobedience and disruption plans. Lacy MacAuley has been one of the main public faces of DisruptJ20, conducting numerous interviews with the news media as an activist with the group. Her contact details are listed on DisruptJ20’s website. From 2011 until the end of 2013, MacCauley, who turned down a Breitbart News interview request, served as a media activist at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) which has received financing from George Soros’s Open Society Institute. IPS regularly partners with the Center for American Progress to produce joint documents and reports on progressive issues. CAP was founded by John Podesta, the former chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Podesta previously served as a counselor for President Obama’s White House and chief of staff to President Bill Clinton. IPS and CAP previously released a “Unified Security Budget,†a list of defense spending recommendations that were partially adapted by the Obama administration. MacAuley’s IPS bio evidences her ties to professional leftist groups, including the controversial, now defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) Project Vote, and United for Peace and Justice. Her IPS bio reads: Lacy came to IPS after doing communications for a variety of progressive organizations through the progressive PR firm Massey Media LLC and as a single contractor. She has done media relations work with groups such as Project Vote and ACORN, United for Peace and Justice, Jubilee USA, Mountain Justice Summer, the IMF Resistance Network, and the Solidarity Center (international affiliate of the ). The only other contact listed on DisruptJ20’s website is for organizer Legba Carrefour. Speaking to the Boston Herald, Carrefour made clear DisruptJ20’s intention is to cause “chaos†at the inauguration. “If the headline (on Jan. 21) is ‘Donald Trump inaugurated amid complete chaos and a cluster (expletive),’ then we won,†Carrefour said. “A lot of us are people who could be considered anarchists. None of us have respect for the office or the man. †On his Twitter account, Carrefour describes himself as a “rather glam anarchist who lives, writes, and organizes a metric f*ckton of protests in Washington, DC. †Another protest organizer has been identified as Scott Green, a leader with the D. C. Coalition. Green was captured allegedly plotting inauguration hijinks in an undercover video released yesterday by Project Veritas. “I was thinking of things that would ruin their evening, ruin their outfits and otherwise make it impossible to continue with their plans. So they get nothing accomplished,†Green says in the video. Green and his group were involved in violent protests in Sacramento in June. Local Fox40 reported: “I would use the word force. and other fascists don’t back down, they can, and they ought to be made to back down,†said Scott Green, a supporter of the Action group, also known as Antifa. Green, who used an alias while speaking to FOX40 for safety, did not attend the protest, but he says he has been present at similar ones that ended violently. Antifa itself isn’t new, but is an offshoot of the group Action, which started in the late ’80s in Minneapolis. Anther activist caught allegedly plotting against the inauguration in the Project Veritas video is Luke Kuhn. “If you had a pint of butyric acid, I don’t care how big the building is, it is closing,†Kuhn says in the video during a conversation about setting off a chemical concoction to cause the evacuation of one of the planned inauguration balls. One Luke Kuhn protested President Bush’s inaugural in 2001 and was quoted at the time in the Baltimore Sun as a “veteran protester. †Kuhn told the newspaper about his plans to bypass police checkpoints at Bush’s inauguration that year. “If people pass through the checkpoints and the police take their signs, the demonstrators will be made ineffective,†he said. “What I encourage people to do … have 30, 000 people march to one of the checkpoints and demand to get through. †In February 2006, Kuhn led a at a Minuteman Project rally on Capitol Hill against the U. S. guest worker program. Activist Dylan Petrohilos was also filmed by Project Veritas allegedly participating in the DisruptJ20 planning meeting. He doubles as a digital journalist for ThinkProgress, which is a media project of the Center for American Progress. Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio. †Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook. With research by Brenda J. Elliott. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2121 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: CNN s Brooke Baldwin interviewed Fox Sports radio host Clay Travis about his thoughts on remarks made by racist ESPN host Jemele Hill when she called President Trump and Kid Rock white supremacists . Travis attempted to explain how he was passionate about the defense of Hill s First Amendment Right, but felt that ESPN needs to be consistent with who they retain and who they fire over controversial remarks. Travis took it one step further when he told Baldwin: I m a First Amendment absolutist, I believe in only two things completely, the First Amendment and boobs. Brooke Baldwin, who has laughed at CNN host Don Lemon as he remarked about Kathy Griffin s rack on live tv, pretended to be shocked and offended by Travis remarks.Baldwin responded, Hold hold hold on. I just want to make sure I heard you correctly, as a woman hosting this show What did you just say? Watch the video below. We re not sure what is funnier, Clay Travis comments, Brooke Baldwin s attempt to feign disgust or the leftist ESPN commentator Keith Reed s stunned expression.OOPS! It appears as though Brooke Baldwin is only offended when conservatives make off-color remarks about breasts on TV. Watch, as Don Lemon tells former comedian Cathy Griffin that she has a Nice Rack while standing next to Brooke Baldwin. NO double standard here The video above was just part of the drunken exchange between CNN s Don Lemon and Brooke Baldwin that took place on New Years Eve 2017. Here s more of the off-color comments made live during the CNN s New Years Eve coverage:Hey @BrookeBCNN how did you not faint when Kathy Griffin said nipple & Don Lemon got his nipple pierced live on TV? https://t.co/LRMr50n0C3 Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) September 15, 2017Travis was going after CNN hard, calling them fake news on his Twitter account after the incident exploded on social media. Travis claimed that CNN has already asked him to appear on the show again on Monday.CNN is so offended that they already called me and asked if I could come back on Monday. Too perfect. Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) September 15, 2017CNN refuted his claim that they invited him back, so Travis says he going to play a voicemail to prove they re lying:CNN's now lying & saying they didn't invite me back on for Monday. I'll play voicemail for everyone on tomorrow's @outkick show. #fakenews Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) September 15, 2017Race baiter extraordinaire Tariq Nasheed, who can turn grandma baking cookies into a racial issue, had this to say about Travis remarks. LOL! That stunt that Clay Travis pulled on CNN is a tactic commonly used by white extremists .They will troll in order to get their numbers up Tariq Nasheed (@tariqnasheed) September 15, 2017Travis responded to his hilarious tweet:Liking boobs makes you a white supremacist, guys. https://t.co/CU1qrqXUC4 Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) September 15, 2017Twitter users had a hay day with Brooke Baldwin feigning outrage over Travis comment:Killjoy "Brooke Baldwin" Can't Handle A Boob Joke, But Has ZERO Problems Working w/The BIGGEST BOOB In Broadcast News, #DonLemon #CNNSucks pic.twitter.com/eGtETPW5Qy Deplorable R z rbak (@MediaJuggernaut) September 15, 2017 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2122 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The addition of the incendiary writer Milo Yiannopoulos to Friday’s lineup for the HBO series “Real Time With Bill Maher†quickly proved controversial on Wednesday evening when another guest, the journalist Jeremy Scahill, said he would not appear on the show because of Mr. Yiannopoulos’s booking. Mr. Scahill, a and editor of the news site The Intercept, announced his decision on Twitter only hours after Mr. Yiannopoulos’s scheduled appearance was made public. Mr. Scahill said that allowing Mr. Yiannopoulos to appear on “Real Time†was “many bridges too far. †“He has ample venues to spew his hateful diatribes,†Mr. Scahill said in a statement. “There is no value in ‘debating’ him. Appearing on ‘Real Time’ will provide Yiannopoulos with a large, important platform to openly advocate his racist, campaign. It will be exploited by Yiannopoulos in an attempt to legitimize his hateful agenda. †But Mr. Maher defended his decision. “My comments on Islam have never veered into vitriol,†he said. “Liberals will continue to lose elections as long as they follow the example of people like Mr. Scahill whose views veer into fantasy and away from bedrock liberal principles like equality of women, respect for minorities, separation of religion and state, and free speech. If Mr. Yiannopoulos is indeed the monster Scahill claims — and he might be — nothing could serve the liberal cause better than having him exposed on Friday night. †Mr. Yiannopoulos, an editor at Breitbart News, often engages in provocative displays to highlight what he considers the intolerance of the political left. At an appearance in December at the University of he mocked a transgender student while displaying her photograph during his talk. This month, a planned appearance by Mr. Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley, was canceled when protests against the speech turned violent and led to rioting that caused around $100, 000 in damages. He had been invited to speak by the school’s College Republicans group. In a Facebook video posted after the speech’s cancellation, Mr. Yiannopoulos said that the “hard left†was to blame, having “become so utterly antithetical to free speech in the last few years. †“They simply will not allow any speaker on campus, even somebody as silly and harmless and gay as me, to have their voice heard,†he added. Other schools have withdrawn invitations to him in recent weeks. In January, a man was shot during protests outside a speech Mr. Yiannopoulos was giving at the University of Washington in Seattle. Last summer, Mr. Yiannopoulos was barred from Twitter after helping rally other users to direct racist and sexist remarks at Leslie Jones, a star of “Ghostbusters†and “Saturday Night Live. †Mr. Maher, a comedian who is liberal on many issues — he donated $1 million to a “super PAC†supporting President Barack Obama’s in 2012 — features guests from across the political spectrum on “Real Time. †His show on Friday was set to include the comedian Larry Wilmore, the actress Leah Remini and former Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2123 | 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: Jay-Z and Beyonce Buy Confederate Flag? Claim summaries:
contextual information: FACT CHECK: Are musicians Jay-Z and Beyonce attempting to buy up the rights to the Confederate flag to prevent its further use? Claim: Musicians Jay-Z and Beyonce are attempting to buy the rights to the Confederate flag to prevent its further use. Origins: On 7 July 2015 the web site Newswatch33 published an article titled "Jay-Z and Beyonce Attempt to Buy Rights to Confederate Flag to Prevent Further Use," which reported that: article According to Ralph Hammerstein, an attorney representing Shawn Jay-Z Carter and Beyonce Knowles-Carter, the couple is attempting to purchase rights to the Confederate flag to prevent further use of the flag on merchandise. According to Hammerstein, the couple is in the works of purchasing all resell rights to the confederate flag. My clients are adamant about purchasing the rights to the Rebel Confederate flag. They have expressed deep concern regarding the flag and how it is tearing apart our nation. Mr. and Mrs. Carter wants to assist in the abolishment of the flag by purchasing the resell rights to the Confederate flag. If my clients are successful, purchasing the rights would mean that anyone who wants to produce merchandise using the Confederate flag would have to get permission from Mr. and Mrs. Carter. My clients have expressed that they are not looking to profit from the use of the flag but rather prevent any further use of the flag on merchandise, according to Hammerstein. This story was nothing more than yet another bit of fake news from NewsWatch33, a web site that emerged on social media just after the very similar NewsWatch28 fake news site was shuttered (possibly as part of a plot to skirt Facebook's crackdown on fake news articles). Before publishing the above-linked article, the site agitated Facebook and Twitter users by fabricating tales about a white supremacist group that supposedly raised $4 million for the defense of Charleston shooting suspect Dylann Roof and about a girl who was supposedly electrocuted by iPhone ear buds. NewsWatch28 crackdown $4 million electrocuted This story echoed other (fictional) urban legends about prominent entertainment figures attempting to buy up the rights to cultural symbols associated with racism in order the keep them out of the public view, such as one about comedian Bill Cosby's supposedly having purchased the rights to the Our Gang/Little Rascals film shorts, or CNN founder Ted Turner's allegedly having snared the rights to The Dukes of Hazzard television series both with the intent of withholding them from any future broadcasting airings. Our Gang/Little Rascals In this case, however, the rights to the symbol in question could not be bought up by any party, as no one holds a legitimate trademark to the design of the Confederate flag. trademark Last updated: 8July 2015 Originally published: 8July 2015 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2124 | 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: We had bipartisan legislation that got through the Senate that would have prevented bonuses like AIG's and then somehow mysteriously disappeared.
contextual information: As public outrage builds over bonuses issued by bailout recipient AIG, two senators are claiming they tried to outlaw such bonuses but were thwarted by the White House and fellow lawmakers. Sen. Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, and Sen. Olympia Snowe, Republican of Maine, say they proposed an amendment to the stimulus bill in February that would have imposed heavy penalties on bailout recipients that refused to pay back bonuses over $100,000. Wyden made the claim during an appearance onThe Rachel Maddow Showon MSNBC, and in other interviews. Back in early February, you and Senator Snowe added an amendment to the stimulus bill that, I think, would have prevented AIG from giving out these millions of dollars worth of bonuses, Maddow said to Wyden. That amendment was taken out of the bill. Am I right that your amendment would have stopped what we are experiencing right now? You are right, Wyden said. And that's what's so sad about this situation. It simply didn't need to happen. Wyden went on to predict that a similar measure would pass now that the issue has gained so much public attention. I think finally, we'll get it done, he said. The tragedy is it should have been done a month ago when we had bipartisan legislation that got through the Senate and then somehow mysteriously disappeared. In a separate interview with the Huffington Post, Wyden blamed both the White House and fellow legislators, suggesting they caved to lobbyists for Wall Street who opposed the measure. Wyden and Snowe announced the amendment Feb. 4, proposing it be tacked onto another amendment to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, otherwise known as the stimulus bill. Last year's financial rescue package, commonly known as the bailout, had left open the escape hatch of golden parachutes for top executives on Wall Street, Snowe, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said at the time. This amendment insists on strong taxpayer protections and guarantees that no tax dollars be used to prop up Wall Street executives. The amendment required companies that received government rescue funds in 2008 to repay within four months any bonuses above $100,000 or face an excise tax of 35 percent on the portion of the bonus over $100,000. It reportedlywould have raisedas much as $3.2 billion, a substantial chunk of the $18.4 billion in employee bonuses paid out in 2008 by companies that received more than $274 billion of bailout funds. Wyden pressed Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on the amendment at a Senate Budget Committee hearing on Feb. 11. Given the fact that the president, to his credit, called these bonuses shameful, and time is short, where do you stand on getting a solution to the problem of these just-paid excessive bonuses in the economic stimulus legislation? Wyden asked. We've talked about that privately, Geithner said, in part, in a lengthy response. Our staffs are working together. We'd like to work with you on how to achieve that objective. American Banker, a trade publication, reported on Feb. 12 that the banking industry strongly opposes the provision, which the banking industry hopes to scale back when the House and Senate hash out differences between the stimulus bills. They appear to have succeeded. On Feb. 12, the Associated Press reported: The provision was removed as House and Senate negotiators hammered out final details of the $789 billion economic stimulus legislation this week. There is no documentation in the public record of exactly who removed the provision. Wyden overstated the case a bit when he responded in the affirmative to Maddow's suggestion that the amendment would have stopped what we are experiencing right now. It would not have eliminated the bonuses entirely only that portion over $100,000 per person. And the tax that would have been imposed on companies that did not comply would have recovered just 35 percent of the excessive amount. But Wyden can legitimately claim to have taken on the issue with gusto well before the current outrage over AIG's bonuses. We find his claim to be Mostly True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2125 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: These deplorable people are just incapable of taking personal responsibility for their own words and actions.Racism was one of the central themes of Donald Trump s campaign. So much so, that white supremacists and KKK members flocked to support him.But, of course, conservatives are defending Trump by blaming it all on President Obama.While walking through a diner interviewing white people to get their thoughts on the election, Abby Huntsman talked to a man named Dan who claimed that racism didn t start until President Obama first took office eight years ago. Apparently, this jackass literally thinks racism didn t exist before 2008.He began by claiming that the reason people are protesting Donald Trump is because they were indoctrinated in the schools as kids. It starts in the elementary schools where they re just brainwashing kids, Dan claimed. Our history is really not our history, but they re rewriting history. The only ones rewriting history in this country are racist conservatives who want to pretend that the Civil War wasn t about slavery, that slavery was just some kind of worker exchange program, and that Moses was a founding father. Seriously.When asked what he would say to the protesters, Dan said, Grow up. It s disrespect for the law, disrespect for authority. This is coming from a man who probably hoped conservatives would attempt a bloody coup if Hillary Clinton had won. I don t seem to remember any conservatives calling those threats disrespect for the law. The hypocrisy is strong in this one.Then Dan insisted that everything started going downhill in 2008 when President Obama was first elected. Dan accused Obama of being a racist and claimed that he defended every black person who broke the law. Because he he was himself a racist, Dan told Huntsman. And, I mean, that s harsh but he was. I mean, he defended every black person that caused a crime. No, he wasn t. President Obama was merely calling out the documented excessive use of force some police officers have been using against people of color. That s not racist.When Huntsman expressed doubt about Dan s accusation, he went even further by claiming that President Obama s policies are racist. But that s not true either. President Obama has taken a lot of flack for not focusing as much on specifically helping the black community, in fact. His policies, such as Obamacare, helped people of all races, including Dan, get health insurance that they couldn t previously afford.That s just reality.Here s the video via Youtube:You have to wonder who conservatives are going to blame when they no longer have President Obama to point their grubby little fingers at.Featured Image: Screenshot | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2126 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Leon G. Cooperman, one of the early titans of the hedge fund industry, is gearing up for the biggest fight of his career: preserving his Wall Street legacy as regulators accuse him and his firm of insider trading. The stakes are high, too, for the Securities and Exchange Commission, which on Wednesday sued Mr. Cooperman, a billionaire, accusing his firm, Omega Advisors, of reaping $4 million in illegal profit by using nonpublic information about an energy deal in 2010. The case is the most prominent to be brought by the agency since a court ruling that narrowed the definition of insider trading. Hours after the civil complaint was filed, Mr. Cooperman fired back with a detailed rebuttal sent to investors. He followed with a defiant conference call, opening with an joke about an man bragging about having sex with an woman. He told investors on the call that he had refused to settle and that he would fight the S. E. C. in court. The stage is set for what is expected to be a legal battle between a gruff, outspoken investor and an agency that has come under criticism for not taking more cases to trial. Mr. Cooperman, the son of a South Bronx plumber, is known for not holding back. In 2011, he wrote a much publicized “open letter†accusing President Obama of “villainizing the American dream†and the wealthy. “It took me 50 years of hard work and playing by the rules to get where I got. I’m not going to let these people destroy my legacy,†Mr. Cooperman told investors on Wednesday. Regulators contend that Mr. Cooperman used his position as one of the biggest shareholders in Atlas Pipeline Partners to gain confidential information from an unidentified executive at the company about the sale of one of its facilities to another energy company in July 2010. Mr. Cooperman had assured the executive that he would not trade on the information, but regulators said that despite making that promise, he had his firm accumulate a bigger position and profited when Atlas’s stock jumped 31 percent after the sale was announced. The case also involves some family drama. Mr. Cooperman’s timely trades indirectly benefited a grandson, whose account Mr. Cooperman managed. Regulators said the money manager bought an Atlas Pipeline bond that rose in value after the deal. And in another twist, Mr. Cooperman’s son, Wayne, who runs another hedge fund, may get drawn into the fray because of his own trading in the same stock. In his letter, Mr. Cooperman said his son was prepared to testify on his behalf, noting that his son’s fund, Cobalt Capital Management, was betting against shares of Atlas Pipeline at the time and he is one of the biggest investors in his son’s firm. Mr. Cooperman said he did not share any information about the sale of the facility with his son. In the complaint, however, the S. E. C. quoted an email that Mr. Cooperman sent to an unidentified relative — described as the manager of another hedge fund — informing him of the $682 million deal. This same relative may have been the first to have sounded the alarm about unusual trading in shares and options of Atlas Pipeline the day the deal was announced, according to the S. E. C. In a separate email, the relative writes to an executive at Atlas Pipeline, calling the options trading before the sale announcement “fishy†and “shady. †The relative goes on to say that “somebody should investigate†and then asks: “How do I become a . †Mr. Cooperman’s son did not return a phone call seeking comment. But his firm did buy shares in Atlas Pipeline later in 2010, according to regulatory filings. Wayne Cooperman has not been charged with any wrongdoing. Regulators also contended that Mr. Cooperman tried to conceal his actions after Omega received a subpoena relating to the Atlas trades some 17 months later by contacting one of Atlas’s executives in an attempt to “fabricate†a cover story in the event that either man was questioned by regulators about the trade. Mr. Cooperman “allegedly undermined the public confidence in the securities markets and took advantage of other investors who did not have this information,†Andrew J. Ceresney, the S. E. C. ’s chief of enforcement, said in a statement. The civil case against Mr. Cooperman, filed in the Federal District Court in Philadelphia, would appear to sidestep a monkey wrench thrown into some insider trading prosecutions by a recent appellate court decision. That ruling made it more difficult to charge someone with insider trading if the person improperly leaking confidential information was not getting a personal benefit of some consequence. The personal benefit issue would not seem to arise in this matter because regulators contend that Mr. Cooperman “misappropriated†the confidential information about the impending sale from the unidentified executive at Atlas Pipeline. Ted Wells and Daniel Kramer, his lawyers at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton Garrison, issued a statement in which they called the allegations “entirely baseless. †Mr. Cooperman said he was being charged with trading on paper gains and added that his firm never sold shares after the deal was announced. He said much of the firm’s trading was related to positions in a stock that the firm had been bullish on for many years. In some insider trading cases, hedge fund managers have been forced to shut their firms and return money to investors. On Wednesday, Mr. Cooperman emphasized that 35 percent of Omega Advisors’ $5. 4 billion in assets under management belonged to members of the firm and that business would continue as usual. He added, however, that if the firm concluded that the S. E. C. case had “become too much of a distraction,†it would voluntarily give back money. Omega is the second large hedge fund to be rocked by an insider trading investigation this year. In June, securities regulators and federal prosecutors charged a top manager at Visium Asset Management with insider trading. The manager, Sanjay Valvani, committed suicide a week later. Visium’s founder, Jacob Gottlieb, whom the authorities did not charge, is in the process of shuttering the hedge fund after selling some of its funds to AllianceBernstein. The two cases show that insider trading remains an issue in the nearly $3 trillion hedge fund industry even after a sweeping crackdown by federal prosecutors in Manhattan. That push led to convictions and guilty pleas from more than 80 people, including Raj Rajaratnam, the billionaire of the Galleon Group. Another firm, SAC Capital Advisors, a $14 billion hedge fund, pleaded guilty to insider trading and paid $1. 8 billion in fines to federal authorities. In the civil complaint on Wednesday, the S. E. C. also accused Mr. Cooperman of failing to report in a timely manner information about his hedge fund’s holdings and other transactions in publicly traded companies in violation of federal securities laws more than 40 times. Regulators said Mr. Cooperman “repeatedly violated†federal securities laws requiring investors to disclose when their equity interest in a publicly traded company rises above either a 5 or 10 percent stake. Speaking at a private charity event in June at the Metropolitan Club in Manhattan, Mr. Cooperman addressed the looming investigation, telling the Wall Street audience, “I call companies, that’s what I do for a living. †He said: “Every time I speak with a company I say the same thing: Don’t disenfranchise me if I ask you a question. Don’t answer a question if you’re not prepared to give anyone else that information, just tell me it’s confidential and we’ll move on. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2127 | 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: Bill Cosby on Blaming White People Claim summaries: Did comedian Bill Cosby's remarks form the basis of a 'We Can't Blame White People' essay?
contextual information: Comedian Bill Cosby's remarks form the basis of a 'We Can't Blame White People' essay. Example: [Collected via e-mail, October 2005] They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English. I can't even talk the way these people talk: "Why you ain't? Where you is? What he drive? Where he stay? Where he work? Who you be?" And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk. Then I heard the father talk. Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can't be a doctor with that kind of language coming out of your mouth. In fact, you will never get any kind of job that pays a decent living. People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around. The lower economic people are not holding up their end of this deal. These people are not parenting; they are buying things for kids—$500 sneakers for what? And they won't spend $200 on Hooked on Phonics. I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18, and how come you didn't know that he had a pistol? And where is the father? Or who is his father? People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack— isn't that a sign of something? Or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up and has all types of piercings going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua, and Mohammed, and all of that nonsense, and all of them are in jail. Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. We have got to take the neighborhood back. People used to be ashamed. Today, a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us. We have to start holding each other to a higher standard. We cannot blame white people any longer. Origins: On 17 May 2004, at an NAACP event commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education, the landmark Supreme Court decision that struck down school segregation, entertainer Bill Cosby gave a speech on the theme of blacks in America taking responsibility for their own lives. In his exposition to that assembly, the man known to television audiences as the lovable, kindly, yet permanently bemused patriarch Dr. Huxtable spoke harshly about his perception of the ills affecting black American society. He cited elevated school dropout rates for inner-city black students and criticized low-income blacks for not using the opportunities the civil rights movement has won for them. Blacks, by their unplanned pregnancies, poor parenting, lack of education, non-standard English, counter-culture dress, and involvement in crime, fail the black community as well as themselves, he said. That May 2004 speech has been both praised and condemned, and excerpts from it have been cobbled together (often in forms that rearrange and present them out of context) and circulated on the Internet under titles such as "We Can't Blame White People" and "Bill Has Done It Again." Bill Cosby has not repudiated his controversial pronouncements or attempted to distance himself from them. Instead, he has chosen to expand upon his theme on subsequent occasions and to make himself a spokesperson for black self-empowerment through education and better parenting. In the service of this cause, he has drawn upon his celebrity to make his voice heard; but, unlike many entertainers who take to the soapbox to decry their bêtes noires, he brings far more to the podium than merely a recognizable face and a fan base. This man, who is best known to the world as a comedian, holds a doctorate in education. He is also highly regarded in the African-American community, where he and his wife, Camille, are prized for their philanthropy. (The Cosbys were present at the NAACP event that sparked the e-mail quoted above in order to be honored for their open-handed generosity in donating money to black colleges.) Dr. Cosby defended his comments almost as soon as he made them. The day after, he said in an interview: "It makes no sense to claim that these are things that belong quietly in the black community. We have to figure out how to get parenting back into the home. This is a problem of epic proportions." Then, in a statement released shortly after the NAACP gala, he made clear his purpose: "I think that it is time for concerned African-Americans to march, galvanize, and raise awareness about this epidemic, to transform our helplessness, frustration, and righteous indignation into a sense of shared responsibility and action." In another interview, he said: "I feel that I can no longer remain silent. If I have to make a choice between keeping quiet so that conservative media does not speak negatively or ringing the bell to galvanize those who want change in the lower economic community, then I choose to be a bell ringer." In July 2004, he again took to the public soapbox to expound upon his thesis. In a speech given at Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition/PUSH Coalition conference in Chicago, he said: "You've got to stop beating up your women because you can't find a job, because you didn't want to get an education and now you're earning minimum wage. You should have thought more of yourself when you were in high school, when you had an opportunity." In December 2004, he addressed a panel at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn, telling them: "Stop waiting for a leader. Get up! Tell your friends. And if they can't get up, we must see about them because they are true victims ... It's time to study four hours a day with your children. Teach them how much they'll be worth when they have A's instead of F's." Barbara "sag your pants, sag your chances," says Cos Mikkelson. Variations: An August 2009 variant prefaced Dr. Cosby's remarks with the following claim regarding their origins: Bill Cosby's response on the Bailout in America. This is actually word for word what he said to a gathering of students who asked about the bailout in America. Great response. This man deserves a Nobel Prize. As noted above, this item dates from a talk Dr. Cosby gave in 2004, so his words had nothing to do with any economic bailouts provided to businesses in 2009. Last updated: 19 May 2014. Harris, Paul. "The Paradox That Divides Black America." The Observer. 9 October 2005. Mitchell, Mary. "Cosby Gave It to Us Straight and It's a Valuable Lesson." Chicago Sun-Times. 3 June 2004 (p. 14). O'Connor, Austin. "A Beloved Comic, Now Crusader." Lowell Sun. 18 November 2004. Suggs, Ernie. "Cosby, Unbowed, Defends Remarks." Cox News Service. 2 July 2004. Associated Press. "Cosby Continues to Challenge African-Americans." 15 December 2004. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2128 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A poster campaign depicting naked children with genitalia of the opposite sex has hit cities across northern Spain thanks to an anonymous American donor. [The posters, which declare that some girls have penises and some boys have vulvas, have appeared at bus stops and metro stations across the Basque Country and Navarre. Created by transgender advocacy group Chrysallis Euskal Herria, the images have appeared in major cities such as Pamplona, San Sebastián, Bilbao and Vitoria, with the backing of local government. They show four naked children holding hands, including one boy with female genitalia and one girl with male genitalia. Underneath, a slogan reads: “There are girls with penises and boys with vulvas. It’s as simple as that. †Beatriz Sever, the group’s press officer, said they were designed to “raise social awareness about transgender children and for these children to feel representedâ€. “There is an evident gap in society’s ability to approach the issue of transgender children in a normal way,†she told El PaÃs. “The more we talk, the easier it will be for some parents to detect what is happening to their own children. Many of them deny their kids’ real identity simply out of ignorance. †The poster campaign was made possible by a 28, 000 euro donation from an anonymous New York businessman. The organisation said he donated the money after reading about an earlier campaign where they handed out educational material in eight different languages. Ms. Sever defended the group’s depiction of naked children, saying: “It makes all the difference between children either being accepted or not. We need to make people understand that nature is not a photocopying machine. Those who deny their identity typically use genitals as an excuse. I myself, as a mother, once used that same argument, until I finally understood what was going on. †The ongoing drive to push transgender ideology onto children is causing concern from some quarters. A report by two psychiatrists last August found most children and teenagers who claim to be transgender change their minds as they grow up. It also warned parents and officials not to impose surgery or treatment on children, saying: “There is no evidence that all children who express thoughts or behavior should be encouraged to become transgender. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2129 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: OK, theoretically, everything will go according to plan, and Donald Trump will be the next president.
But technically, the (s)election hasn’t really taken place yet.
Presidential electors of the mystified electoral college must still actually vote for the president, and there isn’t anything to keep them from ‘voting their conscience’ and choosing someone other than Donald Trump.
Moreover, it appears that there is an active effort to flip the electoral college to deny Trump the presidency, and toss the White House to either Hillary or a GOP loyalist.
The #NeverTrump crowd and plenty of bitter Hillary supporters are still hoping for a coup, though even they admit it is a long shot – completely unprecedented and anything but likely.
According to the Blaze :
Donald Trump may have won the electoral votes necessary to win the White House, but he he’s likely going to lose the popular vote to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. And now two electors have launched a last-minute effort to convince their colleagues to abandon the president-elect.
“This is a long shot. It’s a hail Mary,” Bret Chiafolo, a Washington state elector who previously pledged not to vote for Clinton, told Politico Monday. “However, I do see situations where — when we’ve already had two or three [Republican] electors state publicly they didn’t want to vote for Trump. How many of them have real issues with Donald Trump in private?”
Chiafolo along with Colorado elector Micheal Baca have launched what they call a “moral electors” movement in hopes of convincing 37 of their Republican colleagues to deny Trump their votes. Should they succeed in their radical effort, the presidential decision would be thrown to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
[…]
The Electoral College consists of 538 members who are expected to convene in their respective state capitals on Dec. 19 to formally vote for the next president… Baca said he hopes the move launches a serious national discussion about abolishing the Electoral College , which would require either a constitutional amendment or legislation in several states.
The speculation is that if this maneuver were to be successful, the GOP-led Congress could be persuaded not to choose Hillary, but to write-in a selection for a party loyalist – like Mitt Romney or John Kasich… maybe even a Bush.
Of course, there have also been reports that Team Hillary has been hard at work attempting to persuade electors to switch their votes in the hope, however desperate, that they can still flip the election and take the White House:
On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine – which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!
We are calling on the Electors to ignore their states’ votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why? Mr. Trump is unfit to serve.
The larger issue here is that the system is badly broken, the people are harshly divided along demographic and political lines, and the future is gambling on extreme versions of itself – larger than life candidates, and bizarre back-door maneuvers in attempt to hack the system and bend it in one direction or another.
Trump has taken his place on the stage in a thunderous revolt of the people, but his legacy will be tested out the gates by the heavy pressures of Washington lobbyists, intrigue on the part of political insiders and the cults of opposition that are springing up in response to his controversial journey to the White House.
The entire political establishment have been knocked off their perch, though their hold on power has not necessarily been loosened.
A whole new era is born, and it remains to be seen how it will play out.
Read more:
It’s Not Over Yet: “They Are Probably Still Trying To Steal The Election” | Calls For Electoral College To Ignore Will Of People
Clinton Insider Confesses: Trump Protests Are Just More Pre-Paid “Soros Riots” to Stir Unrest
“Beware of the Shadow Government”: Ron Paul Advises President-Elect
Trump Surrounded By Bankers, Wall St. Insiders Banging on the Door to Get In: “Draining the Swamp?”
“Violent Revolution If Trump Lets Them Down”: People Remain Poised for Angry Revolt – Roberts | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2130 | 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 Joe Biden passed a tax bill that gave us all these privileges for depreciation and for tax credits. We built a building, and we get tax credits like the hotel on Pennsylvania Ave. Claim summaries: A 2009 law during the Great Recession expanded taxpayers ability to reduce previous years tax liabilities by carrying back business losses., Trump has also benefited from a historic preservation tax credit for renovating the Old Post Office in Washington, D.C., into a luxury hotel., To be clear, theres no link between the 2009 law and the tax credit for Trumps Washington hotel.
contextual information: President Donald Trump disputed theNew York Times' reportthat he paid little to no federal income taxes in many years,claimingin the first presidential debate with former Vice President Joe Biden that he actually paid millions of dollars in federal income taxes. At the same time, Trump also said he tries to reduce what he pays through legal tax maneuvers, and he blamed Biden for the laws that let him do so. I dont want to pay tax, Trump said at one point. Like every other private person, unless they're stupid, they go through the laws, and that's what it is, Trump said. (Biden) passed a tax bill that gave us all these privileges for depreciation and for tax credits. We built a building, and we get tax credits like the hotel on Pennsylvania Ave. Trumps claim that he paid millions of dollars in federal income taxes in 2016 and 2017 is countered by the New York Times, which obtained years of his tax-return data. But we wondered about the presidents claim about a Biden-passed tax bill. Asked what Trump was referring to, the Trump campaigncited a passagein the Times report, which described how Trump got a $72.9 million tax refund due to a change made under President Barack Obama. The change was part of a law enacted during the Great Recession. It allowednet operating lossesincurred by businessesin 2008 and 2009to be deducted from tax liability for the previous five years, rather than the prior limit restricting such carrybacks to two years. Biden was vice president at the time the provision kicked in. Now business owners could request full refunds of taxes paid in the prior four years, and 50 percent of those from the year before that, the Times wrote. Trump took advantage of this change to wipe out the federal income taxes he paid from 2005 through 2007 with the tax refund, which he claimed and received starting in 2010, according to the Times. The refund is the subject of an audit by the Internal Revenue Service. What does that have to do with depreciation and tax credits? Without access to Trumps tax returns and financial records, its difficult to know what privileges Trump was talking about. The Trump campaign did not respond when PolitiFact asked if there were other tax bills or privileges linked to Biden that Trump was referencing. But tax experts said Trumps mention of the historic preservation tax credit he received for his hotel in Washington appears to jumble the details between the tax refund he got and other tax deductions or credits he may have taken to reduce his tax liability over the years. One could view the statement (from Trump) as simply confused and getting the details badly wrong, said Daniel Shaviro, a professor of taxation at New York University School of Law. Trumps debate-night claim has to do with theprovision passed under Obamathat allowed losses from businesses to be used to recoup taxes paid in the previous five years. The provision was part of theWorker, Homeownership and Business Assistance Act of 2009. A business can only carryback or carryforward certain amounts, and that bill removed some of those restrictions temporarily for 2008 and 2009, said Joseph Bishop-Henchman, the vice president of tax policy and litigation at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation. Its an efficient, relatively hidden way to help certain rich people, added Edward McCaffery, a professor of law, economics and political science at the University of Southern California, whonoted in an op-edthat a similar provision was included in the coronavirus relief bill from March. Joe Biden speaks at a panel on the economy in Washington on Nov. 5, 2009, one day before the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 was signed into law. (AP) In Trumps case, the change let him request the tax refund that is now being scrutinized by the IRS and a congressional tax committee. If the IRS decides the refund was illegitimate, the Times reported Trump could owe the government more than $100 million. The audit dispute over Trumps tax refund may center, according to the Times, on Trumps declaration in his 2009 tax return of more than $700 million in business losses. The Times said the materials it obtained did not show which business or businesses created those losses. The carryback rule would have allowed losses incurred for any reason to be applied to income up to five years in the past, McCaffery said, including losses from depreciation, or the reduction in the value of property or an asset over time. But its unlikely that all Trumps losses are from depreciation, experts told PolitiFact. The Times reported that Trumps records show that his casinos, golf courses and other interests lose real money, and that he has lost chunks of his fortune even before depreciation is figured in. We'd have to know precisely where the excess losses that he had circa 2009 came from, McCaffery said. The fact that this is what the IRS is auditing strongly suggests its not simply depreciation, which would be based on easily audited facts. Theres a lot more to what hes done than just using depreciation and tax credits, added Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Other tax maneuvers documented by the Times included questionable write-offs for business expenses and a charitable tax deduction. But the $700 million in losses appears to correspond with Trumps decision to part ways with his casinos in Atlantic City, N.J., the Times reported. Theres no obvious connection between the 2009 bill, whichdoesnt mentiondepreciation, and other depreciation deductions or tax credits Trump may have applied. Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said the change to carryback rules was not a tax credit. Trumps reference to his hotel in Washington, D.C., further muddles the facts. The exterior of the Trump International Hotel in Washington on Oct. 26, 2016. (AP) A 2015reportby Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., found that the Trump Organizationgot $40 millionin the form of a historic preservation tax credit for renovating the Old Post Office into a hotel, which the Times said he has used to reduce his tax liability in more recent years. But that type of credit has beenon the bookssince 1976. This didnt have to do with any policy change on the part of the Obama administration or Congress, Watson said. Laws enacted under Obama didcreate or extendseveral tax credits. Bishop-Henchman noted that Obamaseconomic recoverypackagesextendedprovisions allowing businesses todeduct 50% of the costof certain properties up front, rather than write all costs off over time. As a U.S. senator representing Delaware, Biden also voted yes on a pair of bipartisan tax laws in1981and1986that overhauled the depreciation system, Watson said, while also noting that depreciation existed in a slightly different form before 1981. We dont know how those particular changes impacted Trumps specific tax situation, Watson added. Depreciation changes in the code are generally changes in timing of when expenses associated with an investment are deducted, so they do not impact total tax paid in the long run. Regardless, Biden was just one senator. Its always peculiar when Trump is blaming Biden for legislation that happened to be enacted when Biden was in office as a senator or the vice president, Rosenthal said, noting that there are many more people involved with tax legislation. Trump said Biden passed a tax bill that gave us all these privileges for depreciation and for tax credits. We built a building, and we get tax credits like the hotel on Pennsylvania Ave. A 2009 provision enacted under Obama allowed losses to be used to reduce tax liability for up to five previous years. The Times reported that Trump used this provision to claim a major tax refund. At the time, Biden was vice president. Other depreciation deductions and tax credits that Trump may have applied including the decades-old tax credit for his hotel in Washington are not clearly linked to Biden or to the 2009 provision that let Trump claim his refund. Overall, Trumps claim is partially accurate. We rate it Half True. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2131 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: One man was set to testify against the Clinton Foundation next week. That man was 50 year old former Haitian government official Klaus Eberwein. He was found dead in his Miami home with a gunshot to the head that s been ruled a suicide by the Miami-Dade s medical examiner records supervisor. (Think Vince Foster)Klaus Eberwein, a former Haitian government official who was expected to expose the extent of Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week, has been found dead in Miami. He was 50.Eberwein was due to appear next Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors.Eberwein, who had acknowledged his life was in danger, was a fierce critic of the Clinton Foundation s activities in the Caribbean island, where he served as director general of the government s economic development agency, Fonds d assistance conomique et social, for three years.According to Eberwein, a paltry 0.6% of donations granted by international donors to the Clinton Foundation with the express purpose of directly assisting Haitians actually ended up in the hands of Haitian organizations. A further 9.6% ended up with the Haitian government. The remaining 89.8% or $5.4 billion was funneled to non-Haitian organizations. The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace, Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year.The former director general of Haiti, who also served as an advisor to Haitian President Michel Martelly, was also a partner in a popular pizza restaurant in Haiti, Muncheez, and even has a pizza the Klaus Special named after him.According to the Haiti Libre newspaper, Eberwein was said to be in good spirits , with plans for the future. His close friends and business partners are shocked by the idea he may have committed suicide. It s really shocking, said Muncheez s owner Gilbert Bailly. We grew up together; he was like family. Your News WireAmericans were warned about the crooked dealings of the Clinton Crime family when in September of 2016, former Senate President of Haiti, Bernard Sansaricq, shocked a large crowd at a Trump campaign event in Little Haiti, FL. Sansaricq stood up during the public event and relayed his account of the Clinton s dirty dealings in Haiti while he was still in office. To his credit, candidate Donald Trump allowed Sansaricq to speak his mind, and to expose the crimes of the Clinton s, who were attempting to scratch and claw their way back into our White House.Sansaricq claimed he begged the Clinton Administration not to invade Haiti. His request was followed up with a visit by an anonymous messenger from the White House who encouraged him to side with the Clinton Administration and he would be the richest man in Haiti. He also demanded that Hillary Clinton disclose the audit of all money related to the Haiti earthquake crisis, as he claimed they scammed the poorest citizens of Haiti out of BILLIONS of dollars through the Clinton Foundation. Not even 2% of that money went back to Haiti. So Mr. Trump, we are asking you, begging you, the Haitian community will side with you if one day, you ask Hillary Clinton publicly to disclose the audit of all of the money they have stolen from Haiti in 2010 after the earthquake. Haiti is a very poor country. Haiti needs defenders. You said you would champion our cause. We welcome you sir and we will work with you. Ask Hillary Clinton publicly, during your next debate for an audit of all of the money they have stolen from Haiti. Go to the 5 minute mark of the video to see Sansaricq s comments to candidate Trump: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2132 | 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 Trump receive a military that was weakened from Obama? Claim summaries: U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly exaggerated the "depleted" state of the military when he took office.
contextual information: One claim that has often been repeated by U.S. President Donald Trump is that he rebuilt a military that was "totally depleted" by his predecessor, Barack Obama. Trump's grievance is based on a grain of truth: military spending was reduced during Obama's second term, but Trump's statements on the matter have combined distorted facts with outright falsehoods. The way Trump tells it, the United States military was in complete shambles when he took office. Over the years, Trump has made a variety of statements to perpetuate this notion. In one oft-repeated story, Trump illustrated his claim that Obama depleted the military by saying that the armed forces had "no ammunition" when he took office. In October 2019, for instance, Trump said, "When I took over our military, we did not have ammunition." This is not true. The military did not run out of ammunition during the Obama administration (or during any other administration, as far as we can tell). In addition, Trump falsely claimed in August 2018, as he was signing the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2019, that the military had not received any money for years. Trump said, "We've been trying to get money. They never gave us money for the military for years and years. And it was depleted." This, again, is false. In fact, approximately $600 billion was spent on the military in the year before Trump took office. President Trump has also mischaracterized his own military spending. On May 22, 2020, during a speech at the "Rolling to Remember Ceremony: Honoring our Nation's Veterans and POW/MIA," Trump claimed that he spent trillions on equipment: "We've invested $2.5 trillion in all of the greatest equipment in the world, and it's all made here, right in the USA." This is not true. The $2.5 trillion figure refers to the total Department of Defense (DOD) budget that was passed under Trump—comparatively speaking, Obama's budget during his first term was about $3.3 trillion and $2.7 trillion during his second term—but only a portion of the DOD budget is spent on equipment. The amount spent on procurement, or the act of obtaining military equipment and supplies, varies from year to year, but it generally made up about 15% of Trump's total military budget. While Trump has told several falsehoods about how Obama supposedly "totally depleted" the military, there is some general truth to the idea, as overall military spending was reduced during the Obama administration. However, there is a bit more nuance to this issue than is often heard on the campaign trail. While the military was leaner during the Obama years, the Obama administration still spent trillions on national defense. Calculating an exact dollar figure for how much the U.S. spends on the military (and which administration is responsible for that spending) is a complicated proposition. The military budget covers a wide range of expenses across five military branches: the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force. One could also factor in money spent on the Department of Veterans Affairs, on overseas contingency operations, and on other security agencies, such as Homeland Security. Military contracts and budgetary plans also often overlap presidential terms, meaning that spending authorized under one president may end up getting spent under another. Furthermore, each president is faced with different domestic and global threats, which require different approaches and therefore different spending. Lastly, no president has sole discretion over military spending. For instance, sequestration, a provision of the 2011 Budget Control Act that passed Congress with bipartisan support, limited the amount that could be spent on the military. The "green book," an annual budgetary analysis put out by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, shows that military spending greatly increased following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks during the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. Spending continued to increase after Obama took office. In 2010, there was a slight decrease in military spending, and that trend continued until 2015. Spending increased again during Obama's final year in office and then continued to increase during Trump's administration. The following chart from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) takes a look at the United States' budget stretching back to the 1980s. The green line at the top of this chart represents the United States budget for National Defense. Trump's military budget for his first four years (approximately $2.9 trillion) was more robust than Obama's budget during his last four years (approximately $2.7 trillion). However, it was smaller than Obama's budget during his first four years (approximately $3.3 trillion). The Marine Corps Times writes that the military the president inherited from Obama was not depleted or facing a massive readiness crisis, which resulted from massive underfunding in the Obama years. In fact, | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2133 | 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 to Ban 'Amen Posts' Claim summaries: There's no truth to a rumor that Facebook is banning "amen posts" (in which social media users are exhorted to type "amen").
contextual information: On 8 June 2016, the Facebook page "God First Ministries" shared a message claiming that posts containing the word "Amen" were being banned by the social media site: Speak up America! Don't let our Freedom of Speech be silenced!Share to show FB we will say AMEN! The comment section of the Facebook post displayed above quickly filled with messages (including many simply consisting of the word "amen"). On 17 June 2016, more than week after this message was posted to Facebook, it had accumulated close to 7,000 comments and had been shared more than 60,000 times. But curiously, Facebook had not deleted this message: In addition to the proliferation of "amen" posts on Facebook, several groups and pages containing the word "Amen" (such as Peruvian band Amen, the advertising agency Amen Communications, and the political group Trump Amen Time To Win) are still operating on the web site, showing that the word has not been flagged for removal, either. Amen Amen Communications Trump Amen Time To Win The Facebook post displayed here (like all "type amen" posts) is a version of the common like farming scams, in which a Facebook page shares a salacious, outrageous, and often inaccurate post for the sole purpose of gaining likes and shares. Typing "amen" or anything else below a post contributes to its popularity on the site and bypasses certain algorithmic controls Facebook has against scams in advertisings. This social popularity can later be leveraged for monetary gain. like farming popularity Facebook hasn't banned "type amen" posts. However, since Facebook is a private company and users of the site have to agree to its terms of service in order to sign up for an account, placing controls on its content would not constitute a violation of freedom of speech. terms | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2134 | 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 Pelosi advocating for ensuring a minimum income for undocumented immigrants in the upcoming COVID-19 stimulus package? Claim summaries: A right-wing provocateur made the claim in a May 2020 tweet as federal leaders negotiated what to include in their next COVID-19 economic relief package.
contextual information: Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease. fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO On May 4, 2020 as federal leaders debated how to respond to an unprecedented interruption to the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic a conservative provocateur tweeted that U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wanted the country's next economic relief package to establish "guaranteed minimum incomes" for "illegal aliens." COVID-19 Suggesting that only legal U.S. residents should benefit from federal stimulus packages, Charlie Kirk who's the founder of the conservative political group Turning Point USA and social media ally of U.S. President Donald Trump said in the tweet to his roughly 1.7 million followers: To investigate the validity of his claim, we examined Pelosi's public statements and media appearances to determine if, or when, she used the phrased "guaranteed income" and under what circumstances. While Kirk provides no explanation for where or when or to whom Pelosi made the remarks in the above-displayed tweet aside from the tweet's indication with the word "BREAKING" that the House Speaker had made the comments shortly before he composed the post we considered statements by Pelosi since the beginning of the COVID-19 U.S. outbreak in early 2020 for our investigation. Within that timeframe, she used or referenced the phrase "guaranteed income" in three public statements, two of which were televised interviews. First, the House Speaker spoke the words on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" on April 24. In light of the federal government's approval of the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March 2020 (and stimulus bills totaling about $500 billion since then), Maher asked Pelosi if the federal government could afford similar economic relief packages for Americans should the pandemic keep businesses closed and systems locked down in the coming months. She responded: April 24 CARES I think that it should be clear that this (COVID-19 stimulus spending so far) is not doing the job that it is set out to do completely, that we may have to consider some other options. Others have proposed a sovereign fund profits of which go to these unemployed people or guaranteed income, other things that may not even be as costly as continuing down this path. She provided no further details on the so-called proposals for "guaranteed income," which generally refers to a government-imposed system so that every citizen receives a minimum income a central idea of the 2020 presidential campaign by former Democratic candidate Andrew Yang. Also in the conversation with Maher, Pelosi did not explicitly state that she wanted the system implemented via Congressional legislation. Andrew Yang Three days later, however, the House Speaker again said the words "guaranteed income" in a televised interview, this time with more specificity on her openness to the social welfare system. In the April 27 segment of MSNBC's "Live with Stephanie Ruhle," while explaining federal leaders' next steps to help small businesses survive the financial crisis, Pelosi said: MSNBC As we go forward, let's see what works: what is operational and what needs other attention. Others have suggested a minimum income for a guaranteed income for people. Is that worthy of attention now? Perhaps so, because there are many more people than just in small business and hired by small business, as important as that is to the vitality of our economy. And other people who are not in the public sector, you know, meeting our needs in so many ways, that may need some assistance as well. Soon after she made the statement on live TV, news outlets including CBS News and CNBC published stories with headlines such as, "Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans is worth considering for coronavirus recovery." In a story by Business Insider about the televised comments, an aid to Pelosi said the House Speaker was referring to proposals that would guarantee worker paychecks not a sweeping system for universal basic income. CBS News CNBC Business Insider guarantee worker paychecks Then, on May 1, the House Speaker and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus made themselves available to journalists via a conference call to discuss provisions within the CARES Act that exclude immigrants without Social Security numbers from receiving one-time stimulus checks. May 1 receiving one-time stimulus checks. In the call, Pelosi expressed support for legislation that would guarantee COVID-19 economic relief to not only people with Social Security numbers but also immigrants and their families who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs), which the IRS assigns to workers without Social Security numbers, to pay annual taxes. According to the IRS, the federal agency issues the numbers "regardless of immigration status, because both resident and nonresident aliens may have a U.S. filing or reporting requirement under the Internal Revenue Code." In other words, some immigrants who use the identification numbers (ITINs) not social security numbers to pay taxes may be "undocumented." According to a transcript of the May 1 call, at one point a reporter asked Pelosi: transcript Pretty recently you said that Congress should consider adding some form of guaranteed monthly income into the next coronavirus relief package. So I was wondering if you would extend that form of guaranteed income to undocumented immigrants and non-citizens who file taxes with tax ID numbers, ITINs, instead of Social Security numbers? In her response, Pelosi reiterated that she thinks federal leaders should consider guaranteed income and that she would talk to chairs of House committees about exploring the idea further. Additionally, as they consider future economic benefits for Americans during the pandemic, she said: Any way we go down the path that [ITINs] should apply, whether its direct payments, whether its participation in PPP (the federal Paycheck Protection Plan loan program)... I said it [guaranteed income] should be considered. And, why it should be considered, in my view, is because there is a lot of money, federal taxpayer dollars, going out the door. Whether its PPP, whether its Unemployment Insurance, whether its direct payments ... But, whatever we do, I think the tax number is an easy entre to many more people who deserve it, who should get this, but are being cut out now, in whatever it is that we are putting out there. Given the nature of and circumstances surrounding the May 1 call, and considering the fact that Pelosi did not mention "guaranteed income" in any other public statements after the U.S. COVID-19 outbreak and before Kirk's viral posting, we determined it to be the most likely source of inspiration for his May 4 tweet. However, though Pelosi said she wants people who use ITINs to receive economic relief from the federal government during the pandemic a group that would include "undocumented" immigrants she did not say she wants the government to provide stimulus payments to all "undocumented" immigrants. Additionally, the House Speaker said she wanted federal leaders to consider, not implement, "guaranteed income" for Americans, unlike what Kirk's tweet implies. In sum, given those reasons as well as the lack of clarity for what Pelosi means by the phrase "guaranteed income," the context in which she made the comments analyzed above, and the fact that she did say she wanted future stimulus money to help foreign people without Social Security numbers we rate this claim as "false." Rosenberg, Mattew and Rogers, Katie. "For Charlie Kirk, Conservative Activist, the Virus Is a Cudgel."
The New York Times. 19 April 2020. Ruhle, Stephanie. "Pelosi says guaranteed income may be worth considering amid coronavirus hardships."
MSNBC. 27 April 2020. Real Time with Bill Maher. "Speaker Nancy Pelosi | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)."
YouTube. 24 April 2020. Silverstein, Jason. "Pelosi says 'guaranteed income' for Americans worth considering for coronavirus recovery."
CBSNews. 28 April 2020. Zeballos-Roig, Joseph. "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opens the door to guaranteed income for Americans, saying it's 'worthy of attention.'"
Business Insider. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Pelosi Remarks on Press Call with Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Mixed-Status Families on Denial of COVID-19 Stimulus Checks."
Newsroom. 1 May 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle."
Newsroom. 27 April 2020. Pelosi, Nancy. "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher."
Newsroom. 24 April 2020. Internal Revenue Service. "Individual Taxpayer Identification Number."
Accessed 11 May 2020. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2135 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Former British lawmaker Nigel Farage, who successfully led the Brexit campaign, shared his advice on how the GOP can win back the White House: Inspire and engage with real America. We lost touch here with real England and real Britain, and I suspect that much of Washington has lost touch with real America, Farage stated. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2136 | 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: Presidential Food Tasters Claim summaries: Do food tasters work on behalf of U.S. presidents?
contextual information: Claim: Food tasters work on behalf of U.S. presidents. Example: [Collected via e-mail, March 2013] Does President Obama have a food taster? If so, is that unique to him, or is it standard policy? Origins: Food tasters are a concept long associated with important personages such as political leaders and business tycoons. The most common image of a food taster is someone who serves as a guinea pig for his employer, sampling meals before they are served to ensure that no one has tampered with them (particularly by introducing poison or some other harmful substance). Food tasters can serve other functions, however, such as ensuring that foods do not include ingredients that, although ordinarily innocuous, might nonetheless pose a problem for a particular diner, such as wine used in the preparation of a dish intended for someone who is abstaining from alcohol, or an ingredient that a person with specific food allergies might have a sensitivity to. Or a taster may simply function as someone who is intimately familiar with the preferences of his employer and serves to ensure that food is prepared to the latter's culinary satisfaction. Whether food tasters are employed on behalf of U.S. presidents when they're away from the White House is a subject that the Secret Service refrains from officially commenting on, but it's something of an open secret that they are: The US Secret Service has always refused to confirm that US presidents travel with a food "taster," in line with their policy of discretion on all security related issues. But it is known the Service goes to great lengths to scrutinise the source and the preparation of food served to US presidents whenever they eat out of the White House to ensure it is not tampered with. Nonetheless, a March 2013 report about President Obama's supposedly declining to partake of the main course during a lunch meeting with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill because his taster was not present apparently took many readers by surprise: report "Unfortunately, you know, the president can't," said [Maine Senator Susan] Collins when asked if Obama ate at the lunch meeting. "He looked longingly at it," Collins continued. "He honestly did look longingly at it, but apparently he has to have essentially a taster, and I pointed out to him that we were all tasters for him, that if the food had been poisoned all of us would have keeled over so, but he did look longingly at it and he remarked that we have far better food than the Democrats do, and I said that was because I was hosting." This is a subject the press has covered before, though. When the Obamas visited France to mark the 65th anniversary of D-Day in June 2009, for example, the Agence France Presse reported: A US "taster" tested the food being dished up to President Barack Obama at a dinner in a French restaurant, a waiter said. "They have someone who tastes the dishes," said waiter Gabriel de Carvalho from the "La Fontaine de Mars" restaurant where Obama and his family turned up for dinner. "It wasn't very pleasant for the cooks at first, but the person was very nice and was relaxed, so it all went well," he said on the Itele news channel. The Obama Foodorama blog also noted of a September 2012 fundraiser in Tampa that: Obama Foodorama President Obama hailed Food Network star and celebrity chef Tyler Florence's menu as "outstanding" at a $20,000/plate dinner fundraiser held in the backyard of a mansion owned by a billionaire's daughter in the Palma Ceia neighborhood in Tampa, Florida. Host of the show The Great Food Truck Race, Florence created a complicated six-course menu that included chicken fried quail, crispy fried pork belly, and a squash and quail egg ravioli. The chef and his team including wife Tolan Florence and pastry chef Matt Masera tweeted comments, the menu and photos from behind the scenes, revealing that the President was accompanied at the event by a special food taster, identified as a White House chef. Mentions of presidential food tasters have also turned up in the media during earlier administrations, such as a New York Times account of President George W. Bush's inaugural lunch in January 2001: The president's tasters were on the job by 6 a.m., not just to make certain no one was trying to poison him, but to make sure the mushrooms that were to decorate the tenderloin of beef at the inaugural lunch for teetotaler George W. Bush were not cooked in wine. The tasters, Navy mess specialists who travel around the world with the president, watched the preparations in a makeshift kitchen just off Statuary Hall in the Capitol. [Correction: Although the president does not drink alcohol, his diet does not exclude foods prepared with it. A food taster who made sure on Jan. 20 that mushrooms for the meal were not cooked in wine had been told mistakenly that the president avoided alcohol in all foods.] The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported on restaurant screening efforts by a food taster when President Clinton and British Prime Minister John Major visited that city in February 1994: As their staffs scrambled to assemble a five-hour whiz through Pittsburgh, President Clinton and British Prime Minister John Major sent their appetites ahead of them. Planning went on with a team of advance schedulers and security experts fanning out to sites around the region for possible places for Major and Clinton to tour. The search for the right restaurant took special talents a security man was sent to check out the food at area restaurants. "The guy appeared to be a professional food taster because he weighed about 400 pounds," said Tom Pastorius, owner of the Allegheny Brewery and Pub on the North Side, where a government agent walked in and announced he'd been ordered to check out the food for some very important potential diners. Food tasters were also mentioned in a New York Daily News article on White House perks published during the administration of George H.W. Bush in 1992: Among the fringe benefits available to senior White House aides are budget-priced meals in the exclusive, Navy-run White House mess, and use of White House tennis courts and the presidential box at the Kennedy Center. A select few on the senior staff can pump iron in the Secret Service gym. The president, vice president, Cabinet secretaries and White House staff receive a wide range of perks. President Bush gets the most, of course: rent-free housing in the Executive Mansion, free travel on luxurious helicopters, airplanes and armored limousines, a free weekend hideaway at Camp David, Md., and free medical care. He also has a tennis court, workout room, horseshoe pit, swimming pool, theater, bowling alley, extraordinarily well-kept gardens and a staff of more than 90 maids, butlers, carpenters, florists, electricians and cooks and a food taster. Joe Murray also touched on the subject in a 1988 article for the Cox News Service: Everybody probably knew it but me, that Ronald Reagan has a food taster. How I found out was by reading all the way through the news story about the President suffering nausea, vomiting and related stomach problems. This was the night before his meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Noboru Takeshita, which, I suppose, is neither here nor there. Hardly anything I read surprises me much anymore. But the last paragraph was the exception: "As a security measure, Reagan's food is routinely tasted by an aide. (White House spokesman) Fitzwater said he did not know if the tester had also become ill." Last updated: 17 March 2013 Murray, Joe. "Let's Consider This Presidential Food Taster Thing." The [Daytona Beach] News-Journal. 26 January 1988 (p. A4). Roddy, Dennis B. "Food Taster Precedes Clinton and Major." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 26 February 1994 (p. A1). Agence France Presse. "President Obama's French Food Tested by 'Taster.'" 7 June 2009. [New York] Daily News. "Congress, Losing Perks, Takes Long Look at Others'." 31 March 1992. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2137 | 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 Delta Air Lines promoting the purchase of video game consoles to its employees instead of encouraging them to join a union? Claim summaries: In May 2019, social media users shared evidence of the company's controversial campaign to discourage its workers from unionizing.
contextual information: In May 2019, Delta Air Lines came under scrutiny after a photograph emerged on social media that appeared to show a poster encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on video game consoles rather than union dues. Eoin Higgins, an editor and writer at the left-leaning website Common Dreams, tweeted the photograph on May 9. The poster contained the following text: "Union dues cost around $700 a year. A new video game system with the latest hits sounds like fun. Put your money towards that instead of paying dues to the union." The poster featured the Delta logo and the URL of the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com. Eoin Higgins (@EoinHiggins_) tweeted, "lol fuck off @Delta pic.twitter.com/fMNOeW9uFG" on May 9, 2019. The union in question, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), posted photographs of similar fliers encouraging Delta employees to spend their money on watching baseball and football instead of becoming union members. They tweeted, "Oh wow. There's another one. And it's just as bad. Really, @Delta? #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/JsSMg1aBRb" on May 9, 2019. The Machinists Union (@MachinistsUnion) added, "Safe to say @Delta didn't hit a home run with this one either. Three strikes and you're out. Let 'em have it, Twitter. #GameOverDelta pic.twitter.com/veEk8rvtXY" on May 10, 2019. These photographs prompted multiple inquiries from Snopes readers about whether the fliers were authentic and whether Delta was responsible for producing them. A spokesperson for Delta confirmed to Snopes that the airline had indeed created all of the flyers mentioned above, including the "video game" one, and that Delta was also behind the website Don'tRiskItDon'tSignIt.com, which discourages employees—at times in provocative terms—from becoming IAM members. In a statement, the Delta spokesperson wrote: "The direct relationship we have with our employees is at the very core of our strong culture, and it has enabled continuous investments in Delta people. Our employees have the best total compensation in the industry, including the most lucrative profit-sharing program in the world. They want and deserve the facts, and we respect our employees' right to decide if a union is right for them. Delta has shared many communications, which on the whole make clear that deciding whether or not to unionize should not be taken lightly." In a press release on May 9, the IAM criticized what it called Delta's "union-busting propaganda," writing: "Delta Air Lines' all-out assault on their employees' legally protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM representation to more than 40,000 Delta ground workers and flight attendants is succeeding... Delta has resorted to defaming and spewing lies and misrepresentations about the IAM. They also continually display anti-IAM propaganda in the workplace. These are all hallmark signs of how well the IAM campaigns are doing and how scared Delta is of their employees having a voice in their careers." International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Press Release -- IAM Campaigns Strike a Nerve With Delta Bosses." May 9, 2019. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2138 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Puerto Rico senate has approved the PREPA Revitalization Act, intended to restructure the country’s debt-laden power utility, a spokesman for PREPA said. The bill now moves to the Puerto Rico House of Representatives, which would need to approve it before it could become law. “This legislation provides PREPA with critical tools to make PREPA the modern utility that Puerto Rico needs and deserves,†the company said in a statement on Wednesday. PREPA, with more than $8 billion in debt, reached a restructuring deal in December with about 70 percent of its creditors. That deal hit a roadbump in January when Puerto Rico’s lawmakers failed to meet a Jan. 22 deadline to pass necessary legislation. However, the agency and bondholders agreed to extend a crucial deadline to Feb. 16. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2139 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Despite decades of fervent student protests that reached a peak last fall, the president of Yale announced on Wednesday that the university would keep the name of a residential college honoring the politician and white supremacist John C. Calhoun. The president, Peter Salovey, also said the university would name its two new residential colleges for Anna Pauline Murray and Benjamin Franklin. The selection of Ms. Murray, a legal scholar and civil rights activist who graduated from Yale Law School in 1965, represents the first time the school has honored either an or a woman with the naming of a college. Many students were perplexed by the selection of Franklin, who received an honorary degree from Yale. Franklin, like many other founding fathers, was once a slaveholder himself before he became involved in the abolitionist movement. Mr. Salovey explained that Franklin was a “personal hero and role model†of Charles B. Johnson, a businessman and Yale alumnus who donated $250 million to pay for the new buildings — the largest gift in the school’s history — and who suggested the honor. In a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Mr. Salovey said that while Mr. Johnson’s gift was not contingent upon naming the college after Franklin, “I really want you to remember this is the largest single gift ever given to Yale. †In addition, the faculty leaders of all Yale residential colleges will shed their title of master they will now be called heads of college, acknowledging the discomfort many students and faculty members felt toward a title that conjures the country’s history of slavery. As part of the resolution, Yale will start a historical study examining the “ people, events and narratives behind the familiar facades seen on campus,†beginning with an appraisal of Mr. Calhoun’s legacy. The various decisions came in consultation with the Yale Corporation, the university’s governing body. On Wednesday night, the Black Student Alliance at Yale issued a statement calling the naming of Murray College and the abandonment of the master title “ first steps towards creating a better and more inclusive Yale. †Retaining the name Calhoun, they said, “is a regression. †Mr. Salovey defended the Calhoun decision as the best possible way for the university to confront its history. “Universities have to be the places where tough conversations happen,†he said. “I don’t think that is advanced by hiding our past. †Similar heated discussions about historic ties between universities and their racist pasts have inflamed campuses across the country. Princeton’s board of trustees decided this month that the name Woodrow Wilson would remain on its buildings and school, despite vociferous student objections. Mr. Wilson was an admirer of the Ku Klux Klan and reinstated segregation in the federal government. Yale has long grappled with the legacy of Mr. Calhoun, who advocated slavery as “a positive good,†but the issue found footing last fall after an online petition demanding that the college’s name be changed garnered around 1, 500 supporting signatures. The dispute over Calhoun College, founded in 1933, that ensued soon revealed deeper discontent among students and professors over more substantive issues regarding race, in particular what many saw as the university’s lack of commitment to faculty diversity and the alienation experienced by many minority students. A group of student activists — operating under the name Next Yale — handed Mr. Salovey a list of demands last year that included increasing the number and tenure of diverse faculty members increasing the budgets for ethnic and racial cultural centers abolishing the title of master and naming the two new residential colleges after minorities. Those demands were met in part, but students have largely remained skeptical. In November, the university announced that it was committing $50 million to a initiative, an effort to address the fact that less than 3 percent of its Faculty of Arts and Sciences is black. Among Yale’s roughly 5, 400 undergraduates, 11 percent identify themselves as black or . Karléh Wilson, a senior from Louisiana who has helped organize the Next Yale protests, said she felt the university did not go far enough to meet student demands. “There are more than enough alumni of color who the naming committee could have drawn from,†Ms. Wilson, 22, said. Crystal Feimster, a professor of studies, agreed, saying she was “deeply disappointed with the decision not to rename Calhoun†and found the selection of Franklin “a missed opportunity. †Still, she lauded the choice of Ms. Murray, whom she called “a relentless advocate for racial equality and women’s rights. †Jonathan Holloway, the college’s first black dean of students, called this year “a moment of reckoning†that he hoped would strengthen the university. “We’re trying to reconcile our current values and aspirations with these names,†he said. “We will have failed if we do not do that work going forward. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2140 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A senior BlackRock Inc executive made a donation to an unsuccessful U.S. presidential candidate last year, an action that may prohibit the world’s largest asset manager from collecting some fees from a state government, a company regulatory filing showed. Mark Wiedman, a BlackRock senior managing director, donated $2,700 to the presidential campaign of Ohio Governor John Kasich, who was seeking the Republican Party nomination, according to a filing made earlier this year with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and reviewed by Reuters on Monday. Federal securities rules prohibit companies or their executive officers from making donations to government officials who could influence the hiring of a fund manager or have authority to appoint a person who could do so and then providing asset management services to their governments for a fee. The ban is in effect for two years after the contribution is made. The state of Ohio uses BlackRock-managed funds, and its relationship with BlackRock “substantially predates†the donation, the filing said. In the May filing, BlackRock asked the SEC for permission to accept fees from the state of Ohio, saying that exceptions to the rule have been granted before. Without such a ruling, BlackRock said it could face a loss of approximately $37 million. BlackRock said Wiedman asked for and received a refund of his campaign contribution to Kasich, which was “made because of the personal political beliefs of the contributor and not because of any desire to influence the award of investment advisory business.†The SEC has not yet responded to BlackRock’s request. In an emailed statement, BlackRock said its application is “fair and reasonable, and consistent with the intent of the relevant rule.†“The contribution in question was made solely in support of Mr. Kasich’s presidential campaign and for no other purpose,†BlackRock spokeswoman Tara McDonnell said in the statement. “Through BlackRock’s robust policies and procedures, we discovered the contribution in question, and both BlackRock and Mr. Wiedman worked together to promptly address the error, including obtaining a refund of the $2,700 contribution,†McDonnell said. A spokesman for the SEC, Ryan White, declined to comment on the filing. A spokesman for Kasich did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the donation. Wiedman is global head of iShares and index investments, a booming business within BlackRock that includes its exchange-traded funds. The iShares brand brought in nearly $74 billion of new cash into BlackRock in the second quarter. BlackRock manages $5.7 trillion overall. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2141 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WATCH HILL, R. I. — You can’t miss High Watch, a rambling, white clapboard 1920s “cottage†that sprawls atop the bluff that gives this town its name, just before the inflection point, as Nate McBride, a local architect, put it, of the Long Island Sound as it flows into the Atlantic Ocean. It looms over East Beach and Lighthouse Road, a hulking landmark whose most notable public era, for locals of a certain age, was during the 1960s, when its owner at the time, Rebekah West Harkness, a Standard Oil heiress, became a patron of the Joffrey Ballet and then founded her own company. Dancers practiced on the lawn for more than a few summers, though when Mrs. Harkness planted a blue plastic Buckminster Fuller dome there as a practice space, the neighbors were outraged and sued to have it removed. For the last three years, however, the place has belonged to Taylor Swift, bought for $17. 75 million, reportedly in an deal. And the people frolicking on its lawns aren’t ballet dancers, but rather Ms. Swift’s famous friends from the music and fashion worlds. It has become a landmark of a different sort, familiar to Ms. Swift’s 86 million Instagram followers, for the annual Fourth of July party she holds there. With its summer colony — a cohort of multigenerational families tucked into shingled houses — and its diminutive main drag, the picturesque Bay Street, this town is a curious choice for a megawatt celebrity like Ms. Swift, 26. (Why not the potato fields of the Hamptons?) And High Watch is a peculiar spot for such a celebrity to hole up, given its fishbowl site and proximity to the public beach, with an access path that runs along its property line. When Ms. Swift first moved in, “No Trespassing†signs appeared around the property’s perimeter that were prefaced with, “I knew you were trouble when you walked in,†a coy reference to one of her own lyrics that irritated some locals, as did her shoring up, with the blessing of Rhode Island’s Coastal Resources Management Council, the property’s eroding armor stone sea wall and planting a fence at its edge. You didn’t have to be one of her social media followers to see what fun Ms. Swift had there this year. The Boston Globe and Entertainment Weekly were among the many, many publications that printed photos of the star romping in the surf with her friends. There was the actor Tom Hiddleston (the man she started dating shortly after her breakup with Calvin Harris, a D. J. and musician) in an “I ♥ T. S. †tank top embracing Ms. Swift, who wore a red swimsuit that said “America†across her chest. There were Gigi Hadid, Ruby Rose, Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively, among other young celebrities, who rushed into the water, posed for a group shot, and rushed out again, climbing the armor stones to the manicured lawn, upon which they tossed a football and careered down an enormous inflated red bouncy water slide. On a recent Friday, the slide was still visible, but the only dedicated Taylor tourists were four friends from West Springfield, Mass. who had come to spend a day in town. “We knew she lived here,†said Sydney Brosseau, 18, “so we came down to take some photos, too. She’s got a great view!†At the Flying Horse Carousel, which is old enough to be listed on the National Historic Register, Maya Fontaine, a staff member, said she had never had a sighting, but she remains hopeful. “I’m here working almost every day,†she said. “We’re, like, Taylor Swift fanatics in my house. Our manager told us that if we do see her, to not shout or draw attention, because that wouldn’t be polite. †At the Olympia Tea Room, Ms. Swift’s restaurant of choice, the two young hostesses gave a practiced, “We have no comment,†to inquiries. So did a representative at the Ocean House, the enormous yellow clapboard hotel that was shuttered in 2003 and reopened in 2010 after a rebuilding project its seaside terrace offers a nice view of Ms. Swift’s house. In fact, the of the Ocean House may be a more seismic alteration to the area than Ms. Swift’s house purchase or her red bouncy slide. With rooms starting at about $1, 000 a night in the summer, and a square of sand accessorized with tented cabanas and yellow chaises, the Ocean House is a discordant display of gated excess on a beloved public beach. Despite the occasional stalker, like the guy who swam from a state beach in a wet suit early one morning to climb her rocks (odd, because why not just walk?) perhaps the strangest response to Ms. Swift’s residency here was when Gina Raimondo, the new governor of Rhode Island, proposed a tax on second homes worth more than a million dollars that was immediately labeled “the Taylor Swift tax. †(Governor Raimondo quickly withdrew the proposal.) “She has as much right as any human being to own property,†Bill Hecker, a real estate broker, and resident since 1983, said of Ms. Swift. “She pretty much stays to herself because she has to. There are naysayers. I’m not one of them. I’ve never seen her frolicking in the waves, and I’ve never seen the paparazzi. I hope she enjoys living here as much as I do. †Edith Eglin, a summer resident since 1938 and the president of the Watch Hill Chapel Society, said: “I consider her coming here a big surprise and a pleasant one. Did it encourage people with preteen children to come here and buy houses? I don’t think so. Has there been increased air traffic at our little airport? I doubt it. Her plane is too big to get in here. †To Mr. McBride, the architect, “Taylor Swift is an anomaly,†he said. “So she’s like our pet celebrity. Everyone has kind of adopted her and refers to her by her first name. She’s ours now. In a community like this, you either absorb or deflect. †Ms. Swift’s Fourth of July party this year went unnoticed as it unfurled in real time. Watch Hill residents, like the rest of the world, experienced it after the fact, as a media event. In any case, it was quickly overshadowed by the latest chapter in the feud between Taylor Swift and Kanye West, as Mr. West’s wife, Kim Kardashian West, took a swipe at Ms. Swift on her TV show last Sunday. To briefly recap — stay with me here — Ms. Kardashian West then posted recordings of a phone call between her husband and Ms. Swift, in which it sounds as if Ms. Swift is giving her approval to the lyrics of Mr. West’s song “Famous,†an account that Ms. Swift quickly disputed in a statement on her Instagram account. (“Famous,†famously, says some nasty things about Ms. Swift.) What does all this have to do with Watch Hill? The way in which viral media works is through “generators and prompts,†like Ms. Swift’s July 4 Instagram photos, said Charlotte Cotton, curator of “Public, Private, Secret,†an exhibit at the new International Center of Photography museum in Downtown Manhattan, which examines how identity is tied to public visibility. Ms. Cotton saw a direct relation between Ms. Swift’s romping photos and Ms. Kardashian West’s leaked video, which she explained as a kind of celebrity brand smackdown. “If you compare the visual iconography,†she said, “you can see that each is expressing her brand. Kim is about the cult of the individual, and also the power couple. Taylor, she’s all about the kids and the ingénue, and you can see that because her imagery is all about being in groups and frolicking for the camera. It speaks to a quasi younger audience: The digital natives who are driving today’s celebrity culture. I think Taylor Swift’s iconography is deeply threatening to the Kimye brand. †Back in Watch Hill, of course, it is doubtful that anyone is engaging in this sort of deep semiotic discourse. Peter Kaufman, a retired editor living in nearby Westerly, R. I. said, “Before Taylor, the only celebrities that I know of that have been attached to this area are Ruth Buzzi, who was born in Westerly Hospital, and Sergio Franchi, a tenor who used to appear on the Ed Sullivan show, who bought a compound over in Stonington. †Mr. Kaufman said Ms. Swift’s house is a required stop on the Watch Hill tour that he gives houseguests, particularly those with any connection to a preteen girl. A few years ago, Mr. Kaufman took one guest to the terrace of the Ocean House for drinks, because the man, whose granddaughters were in elementary school, was determined to take home photographic evidence of the pop star. The man swore he had captured Ms. Swift’s silhouette framed in a window, Mr. Kaufman recalled, “But we think it was just a lamp. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2142 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: North Korea’s fifth nuclear test is ominous not only because the country is slowly mastering atomic weaponry, but because it is making headway in developing missiles that could hurl nuclear warheads halfway around the globe, threatening Washington and New York City. The reclusive, hostile nation has been rushing to perfect missiles that are small, fast, light and surprisingly advanced, according to analysts and military officials. This spring and summer, Pyongyang successfully tested some of these missiles, while earlier efforts had fizzled or failed. “They’ve greatly increased the tempo of their testing — in a way, showing off their capabilities, showing us images of ground tests they could have kept hidden,†John Schilling, an aerospace engineer and expert on North Korea’s missile program, said in an interview on Friday. “This isn’t something that can be ignored anymore. It’s going to be a high priority for the next president. †Military experts say that by 2020, Pyongyang will most likely have the skills to make a reliable intercontinental ballistic missile topped by a nuclear warhead. They also expect that by then North Korea may have accumulated enough nuclear material to build up to 100 warheads. Siegfried S. Hecker, a Stanford professor who has traveled to North Korea and who formerly directed the Los Alamos weapons lab in New Mexico, the birthplace of the atomic bomb, said North Korea’s progress in missile and nuclear development signals that it has gone from seeing unconventional weapons as bargaining chips to “deciding they need a nuclear weapons fighting force. †The Pentagon warned Congress in a report earlier this year that one of Pyongyang’s latest missiles, if perfected, “would be capable of reaching much of the continental United States. †In congressional testimony, American officials have provided more details. Intelligence analysts, they say, now judge that North Korea can miniaturize a nuclear weapon, place it atop a missile and fire it at the United States — though the odds of a successful nuclear strike are seen as low. Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III, head of the Pacific Command, last year summed up the deep concern. “All the indications are that we have to be prepared to defend the homeland,†he told the Senate Armed Services Committee. North Korea’s own claims about its nuclear capacities are generally viewed with extreme skepticism. The state, led by an erratic, young leader, Kim is notorious for blustering propaganda, fake photos and outright lies. So private analysts and United States intelligence officials have in recent years tracked the country’s progress by studying carefully vetted imagery from satellites, and from North Korea itself, of the growing number of missile firings and engine tests. The experts track how far and fast the missiles travel, and the color of their plumes. Recently, one set of plumes became much cleaner, indicating the successful use of advanced propellants, analysts reported. North Korea is an impoverished nation whose sophisticated missile program has been built with Cold Russian technology as well as the expertise of Russian engineers who moved there in the early 1990s looking for lucrative work after the Soviet Union fell apart, rocket experts and intelligence analysts say. The Soviet Union, if poor in consumer goods, inaugurated the space age in dazzling firsts. Eventually, the United States caught up and won the race, landing astronauts on the moon. As it turns out, Russia’s rocket engines were far more innovative than those the Americans used. Jeffrey Lewis, a North Korea specialist at the Middlebury Institute for International Studies at Monterey, in California, recently noted the grim implications of a on land that featured the debut of a powerful new engine. “That means that, rather than simply hitting the West Coast, an operational North Korean ICBM could probably reach targets throughout the United States, including Washington, D. C.,†he wrote in a blog. Pyongyang obtained its first wave of Russian rocket technology in the 1980s, giving it an ability to make Scuds, missiles with engines that burn kerosene and emit smoky exhaust. Soon, the collapse of the Soviet rocket industry brought North Korea a second wave of far more potent technology. The collapse began late in the Cold War as arms agreements led to deep cuts in both Soviet and American nuclear forces. It accelerated when Russia was unable to create a private industry for putting commercial satellites into orbit. Soon, impoverished rocket designers were fleeing Russia. In one incident in late 1992, officials at a Moscow airport blocked a group of nearly two dozen missile experts, along with their wives and children, from traveling to Pyongyang, the North Korean capital. “I have always believed that our work is the most important,†Yuri Bessarabov, one of the rocket scientists, told Moscow News. “But it has turned out that we are unnecessary. †By the time President Obama took office, in January 2009, Pyongyang had deployed hundreds of and missiles that used motors of Russian design, and had exported hundreds of the weapons armed with conventional warheads to countries including Egypt, Iran and Syria. Typically, the countries bought Scuds. At this time, North Korea was also developing the new generation of missiles powered by a much more advanced engine. Western intelligence analysts were alarmed to discover that the new engine derived from the a compact missile made for Soviet submarines that had carried a nuclear warhead. Its creator was the Makeyev Design Bureau, an industrial complex in the Ural Mountains whose rogue experts had been detained at the Moscow airport. The engine jacked up heat, thrust and range, outpacing the Scud motor. And its propellants were more energetic than the old kerosene fuels. They were hypergolic. That meant the ingredients, when mixed, ignited spontaneously in powerful blasts. They made the smoky kerosene look archaic. The engine was being developed to power a new missile known as the Musudan, named after Pyongyang’s main launching site. The greater thrust of its single engine translated into greater range. Analysts warned that the missile’s warhead might fly for up to 2, 400 miles — far enough to hit the American base at Guam but shy of the minimum intercontinental range of 3, 400 miles. At a military parade in late 2010, Pyongyang unveiled its spinoff, giving substance to years of American intelligence warnings. The Musudan turned out to be 5 feet wide and 40 feet long — remarkably small compared to North Korea’s large missiles, which military analysis saw as sitting ducks. The smaller missiles displayed that day were transported on trucks and could be hauled on country roads through forested regions or kept in tunnels, making them easy to hide and, as a target, difficult to find and destroy. Pyongyang also used the engine design as a building block to make compact missiles that could fire warheads between continents. The missile (Korea North military type 8) was powered by two of the advanced motors. Analysts said its range was intercontinental and might send a warhead plummeting down on the West Coast. The a longer version of the appeared able, in theory, to send one of Pyongyang’s nuclear warheads crashing down on Washington, D. C. Today, the and the are widely seen as the most threatening missiles in North Korea’s developing arsenal, especially given the land test in April of the potent engine that apparently powers them. Still, experts note that North Korea is years away from deploying a reliable missile. For instance, it has yet to master the complex technology needed to protect a nuclear warhead from the searing heat generated as it plunges from outer space to a fiery . Experts also do not see North Korea as being capable anytime soon of building a much more destructive hydrogen warhead, capable of destroying large cities. Still, military officials worry about a day of reckoning. “The intel community assesses North Korea’s ability to successfully shoot an ICBM with a nuclear weapon and reach the homeland as low,†William E. Gortney, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command, told a subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee in April. Eventually, he added, “we assess that this low probability will increase,†and the United States will need to invest in better defenses. Making sure Pyongyang has serious doubts about whether a nuclear strike would ever succeed, Commander Gortney added, “is absolutely critical. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2143 | 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: Im the only member of the House of Representatives who raised most of his campaign funds in the last election from small contributions of less than $200.
contextual information: A day after a Florida man landed a gyrocopter on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol to demand campaign finance reform, U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson discussed his own efforts to focus on small donations and his potential U.S. Senate bid. Grayson, an Orlando Democrat, told a reporter for Democracy Now on April 16 that he will probably run in a primary against U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Jupiter, for Marco Rubio's Senate seat in 2016. As Democratic Party activists and leaders consider their best path to winning that seat, Grayson wants to remind them of his populist fundraising: "I'm the only member of the House of Representatives who raised most of his campaign funds in the last election from small contributions of less than $200," he said. We decided to check if Grayson holds a record in the House for contributions of less than $200. (A spokesman for Grayson told PolitiFact Florida that he is likely a few weeks away from making his decision but reiterated that he has said he will probably run.)
Counting small donations, the Federal Election Commission considers donations of less than $200 as small donations, which don't have to be individually reported. Instead, candidates report a total amount of money from small donors. In the House for the 2013-14 election cycle, those who received the largest share of their campaign revenue from small contributions were Democrats, and Grayson was indeed No. 1, according to a November 2014 analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics. Grayson's small donations totaled about $1.8 million and equaled 57 percent of his $3.1 million in donations. The House member who raised the next highest amount in small donations was Florida's Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, and head of the Democratic National Committee. She raised $1.2 million in small donations, which equaled 47 percent of her contributions. (Wasserman Schultz recently ruled out running for Senate in 2016.) The third-place House finisher was U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, who raised about $850,000 in small donations, or 41 percent of his total.
On the Senate side for the 2013-14 cycle, Democratic Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota topped the list with $11.7 million in small donations, equaling about 40 percent of his total donations. (During his Democracy Now interview, Grayson mentioned U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont as a leader in the Senate in raising small donations. Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats and was re-elected in 2012, raised almost $5 million in small donations, or about 61 percent.)
So why are some members of Congress small donor leaders? In the case of Franken, a former Saturday Night Live star, the Center for Responsive Politics noted that name recognition, combined with hailing from a state with a strong grassroots tradition, doesn't hurt. Grayson's persona as a Democratic firebrand likely contributes to his fundraising abilities. The most successful small-money fundraisers mix media exposure with partisan taunting and ideological appeals, Adam Bonica, a Stanford political science professor, wrote in 2011. Grayson is famous for his provocative taunts against Republicans, such as describing the GOP health care plan as "if you do get sick, die quickly," or comparing Dick Cheney to a vampire. Michael J. Malbin, director of the Campaign Finance Institute and a political science professor at the University at Albany, said polarization alone won't get candidates a lot of money in small donations. In many cases, candidates are tapping into political organizations with an existing network of small donors. Grayson, for example, has received money bundled through ActBlue, an online Democratic fundraising group that focuses on competitive races. Candidates got their boost from national organizations that created support for the candidates by recommending them to donors who trusted the bundling organization(s) and who probably would not otherwise have known who the candidates were, Malbin wrote.
Grayson said, "I'm the only member of the House of Representatives who raised most of his campaign funds in the last election from small contributions of less than $200." Grayson's small donations equaled 57 percent of his donations during the most recent cycle, putting him ahead of second-place finisher Wasserman Schultz at 47 percent, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. We rate this claim True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2144 | 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 11.6 million jobs added to the U.S. economy by Trump during the pandemic?" 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 in 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 |
FMD2145 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Elton John and his longtime boyfriend, David Furnish, entered a civil partnership on Dec. 21, 2005, in England under a law the country had just enacted granting recognition to couples. The congratulations poured in as the two men appeared at a joyous ceremony at Windsor Guildhall, amid a crush of paparazzi. Donald J. Trump, who had known the couple for years, took to his blog to express his excitement. “I know both of them, and they get along wonderfully. It’s a marriage that’s going to work,†Mr. Trump wrote, adding: “I’m very happy for them. If two people dig each other, they dig each other. †Mr. Trump is now the leading candidate for president in the Republican primary, which has traditionally been dominated by hopefuls eager to show how deeply conservative they are on social issues like gay rights and marriage. But Mr. Trump is far more accepting of sexual minorities than his party’s leaders have been. On Thursday, he startled some Republicans by saying on NBC’s “Today†show that he opposed a recently passed North Carolina law that prohibits people from using public bathrooms that do not correspond to the gender they were born with, striking down a Charlotte ordinance. Transgender people should “use the bathroom they feel is appropriate,†Mr. Trump said, putting him at odds with a majority of Republicans in North Carolina. But it is his views on gay rights and gay people that most distinguish Mr. Trump from previous Republican . He has nurtured long friendships with gay people, employed gay workers in prominent positions, and moved with ease in industries where gays have long exerted influence, like entertainment. “He will be the most Republican nominee for president ever,†said Gregory T. Angelo, the president of the Log Cabin Republicans, a group that supports gay rights. Of course, Mr. Trump is not as embracing of gay rights as the Democratic candidates are he said during this campaign that he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, a position he has held since at least 2000, when he briefly flirted with a bid for the presidency. But he does not emphasize marriage as an issue, and he makes no mention of it, for example, on his campaign website, which focuses on issues like immigration and trade. And Mr. Trump, who has inflamed tensions with almost every group, from Hispanics to women to has avoided attacking or offending gay men and lesbians during the campaign. His history with the gay community is a long one. He donated to charities focused on the AIDS crisis in the late 1980s and early ’90s. In 2000, when he briefly considered running for president, he gave an interview to The Advocate, a gay magazine, in which he supported amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to “include a ban of discrimination based on sexual orientation. †“It would be simple. It would be straightforward,†Mr. Trump said in the interview, adding, “It’s only fair. †Sixteen years later, gay rights advocates are still trying to persuade Congress to pass a similar measure, but they have struggled to win support, especially from Republicans. The last Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, opposed similar legislation in 2012. Mr. Trump declined to be interviewed for this article. His ease with gay people does not seem to be the result of deep soul searching, but, rather, the product of the Manhattan social and political world he has inhabited the past five decades. “I live in New York. I know many, many gay people. Tremendous people,†Mr. Trump said in an interview in 2011. He has been playful at times, such as in 2000, when he and Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani appeared in a skit for a political roast, during which Mr. Trump nuzzled and caressed the mayor, who was dressed in drag. Friends say he also views gay rights through the lens of a bottom businessman. “His key concern is, Are you capable and able to do the job I hired you for? And if you are, very little else matters,†said Abe Wallach, an openly gay executive at the Trump Organization in the 1990s. “Very little on a social level will make Donald excited — if it was money or something else, he might get excited. †Mr. Trump was believed to be the first private club owner in Palm Beach, Fla. to admit an openly gay couple, according to Laurence Leamer, the author of “Madness Under the Royal Palms,†a book about Palm Beach society. Mr. Trump made his club, more open partly out of disdain for the restrictions that barred Jews and from joining exclusive clubs in Palm Beach. “It’s one of the best things he’s done in my view in his life,†Mr. Leamer said. “He really changed the nature of Palm Beach. †Rand Hoch, a gay activist who founded the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council in 1988, recalled bringing dates to on two occasions. Both times, he said, Mr. Trump, who loves to play the role of greeter as guests arrive at his club, was pleasant and approached the two for chitchat. “He treated us no differently than everyone else who was going through that door,†Mr. Hoch said, adding that it was not possible that Mr. Trump was unaware they were gay. “He’s perceptive, so I’m pretty sure he didn’t think we were brothers. †Mr. Wallach said that he and his husband would fly on Mr. Trump’s jet to Florida or Atlantic City on weekends. “I found him to be very friendly to my spouse,†he said. “He would often ask about my spouse, how his dental practice was doing. †Mr. Trump’s foundation has given over the years to groups like the AIDS Service Center and the Elton John AIDS Foundation. Some of those donations came more recently in connection with his reality television show “The Celebrity Apprentice,†whose winners got to select the recipient charities. But as early as 1987, Mr. Trump made a $25, 000 contribution to the Gay Men’s Health Crisis, from profits generated by his company’s operation of the Wollman Memorial Rink in Central Park. And in 1992, the Trump Taj Mahal held an event that raised $60, 000 for AIDS research. Mr. Trump’s recent alliances with social conservatives such as Jerry Falwell Jr. and Pat Robertson have alarmed people like Mr. Angelo, whose group, the Log Cabin Republicans, is eager to meet with the real estate mogul to discuss his positions in detail. And some gay acquaintances of Mr. Trump find it puzzling that he cannot support marriage, given his comfort with gay relationships. In 2012, Mr. Trump attended the wedding of Jordan Roth, a Broadway producer, and Richie Jackson, in a ceremony at the Al Hirschfeld Theater. Months later, Mr. Trump went to lunch with the actor George Takei, who is openly gay and was fired by Mr. Trump from “The Celebrity Apprentice. †Mr. Takei approached Mr. Trump at a news conference for the show, saying he would like to try to change his views on letting gay people marry. “He said, ‘George, maybe I could learn something from you,’ †Mr. Takei said in a telephone interview this week from his home in California. The lunch, at Trump Tower, opened with Mr. Trump mentioning the wedding he had attended, which Mr. Takei later learned was that of Mr. Roth and Mr. Jackson. Mr. Takei walked Mr. Trump through the benefits of supporting marriage, particularly for a business owner. Gay couples would celebrate in his hotels, and their guests would dine in his restaurants, Mr. Takei said. Mr. Trump agreed with that view, Mr. Takei said, but he would not budge, saying he supported “traditional marriage. †“I was tempted to say, marrying multiple times is not traditional marriage,†Mr. Takei said of Mr. Trump, who has been married three times. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2146 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said Britain must accept the full economic and legal status quo in a transition period after it leaves the EU and should expect no tailor-made terms on trade in its future relationship. Suggesting a transition should run for 21 months from Brexit on March 30, 2019 until the current EU budget expires at the end of 2020, Barnier said Britain would certainly remain subject to EU laws and courts during that transition. During this period, the EU legal framework including on jurisdiction would continue to apply to Britain, Barnier said in an interview published on Tuesday in Germany s Handelsblatt newspaper. We don t have time to invent a new model. So for a short time after the formal exit from the EU the economic status quo would continue to apply, which besides the internal market also includes the customs union and collective political decisions. In a version of the interview in Belgium s L Echo, he said of the transition: The only difference is that the British would no longer take part in decisions on European legislation. British Prime Minister Theresa May has proposed a transition of around two years to give time to put a new free trade pact in place, although she faces opposition in London from some Brexit supporters who want a clean, quick break. Barnier noted that May had rejected the option of staying in the EU single market long-term the Norwegian model as he called it, referring to Norway s membership of the EU internal market, accepting all its rules and costs without having a say. So we must work on other hypotheses, Handelsblatt quoted him as saying. Another option would be a free trade treaty using the example of the CETA agreement with Canada. It would take several years, however, to negotiate such an agreement. Asked if that meant there could be a specifically British model along the lines of the bespoke arrangements May has referred to without giving detail, Barnier replied simply: No. Quoted by L Echo, he said a trade deal could be agreed in three years meaning that if talks start in December it would be ready just in time for a transition ending in December 2020. He said his staff were already working on drafting a withdrawal treaty that will include terms for transition. Barnier said he still hoped that May could provide more detail on her offer to meet financial commitments on withdrawal so that EU leaders could agree in December to end their refusal to negotiate a future trade deal. May told an EU summit last week that she could not agree a figure until she knows what trade terms the EU offers. Barnier said it was important to de-dramatise talks on the payment. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2147 | 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 issued a warning 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 |
FMD2148 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: On Thursday, Bernie Sanders wife Jane Sanders didn t hesitate to defend her husband s rival, Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton after she became aware that a supporter had disrespected the former Secretary of State.In an interview with CNN s Chris Cuomo, Jane completely dismissed a sexist comment that was made at a Sanders campaign event just the day before. Cuomo asked Jane what she thought about Sanders campaign surrogate and healthcare activist Paul Song making complaints about corporate democratic wh*res who wanted to change the healthcare system. Song s direct comments were: Medicare-for-all will never happen if we continue to elect corporate Democratic wh*res who are beholden to big pharma and the private insurance industry instead of us. Jane handled those comments with the same amount of class we ve seen from her husband during his entire campaign. Cuomo pressed Jane on Song s remarks, asking the Democratic candidate s wife: That was translated as being code for something about Hillary Clinton. Do you believe that, and what do you want to say about that choice of words? Basically, Jane didn t give Song s comments the time of day. She beautifully dismissed and condemned them at the same time, stating: I m sorry, I didn t hear it at all. Strange choice of words. And I can t imagine anybody was speaking about Secretary Clinton that way. I don t know who said that. She added, All the campaigns really need to take some responsibility for what surrogates say. You can watch Jane masterfully shut down Song s comment below:Bernie also joined his wife in her criticism of Song s remarks on Thursday. Bernie, who has throughout the length of his campaign insisted on keeping to the issues and not engaging in the sort of childish in-party fighting that the GOP candidates have participated in, tweeted, Dr. Song s comment was inappropriate and insensitive. There s no room for language like that in our political discourse. After receiving backlash to his comments, Song apologized for his remarks, taking responsibility for their insensitive nature:Later, Song stated that his comments had not been in reference to Hillary Clinton, but to Democrats in Congress. Featured image via Spencer Platt / Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2149 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: It is not yet clear if Britain and the European Union can agree on written assurances to avoid a hard Northern Ireland border by a Monday deadline, Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said on Sunday. But he said he was hopeful a meeting between British Prime Minister Theresa May and European Council President Donald Tusk on Monday would lead to a deal in time for a Dec. 14-15 EU summit. That would allow Britain to move on to talks on its future trading relations with the bloc. Avoiding a so-called hard border on the island of Ireland is the last major hurdle before talks begin on the future trade relationship and a two-year Brexit transition. Tusk said he had asked May to put a final offer on the table by Monday, but Coveney suggested agreement on the wording of written reassurances may come later. The hope is that those [Monday] meetings will result in a momentum that can be carried into the leaders summit the week after ... and can allow this Brexit negotiation process to open up to phase two of discussions, Coveney told RTE radio. Asked if he expected an agreed text of written British assurances on the issue Monday morning, Coveney said: Let s not run before we can walk here. Obviously, we would like that to be the case. The Irish cabinet is to meet at 0900 GMT on Monday and give Prime Minister Leo Varadkar a mandate to make a decision on the border issue. That may or may not be on the back of an agreed wording. That remains to be seen over the next number of hours, Coveney said. Ireland is not asking the British government to do the impossible and provide a detailed plan border will work, but rather for clear principles for the second phase of talks to eliminate the possibility of a hard border. What we have to make sure here is that we don t have an unintended consequence of the re-emergence of a [hard] border, he said. We can t allow that and we won t allow that. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2150 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Opposition leader Alexei Navalny announced on Wednesday a series of rallies across Russia in January to press home his call for a boycott of next year s presidential election, a move likely to draw a sharp response from the Kremlin and police. Navalny unveiled his plan hours after President Vladimir Putin, who polls suggest is a shoo-in for re-election, registered his candidacy at the central election commission ahead of the March 18 vote. The commission ruled on Monday that Navalny was not eligible to run against Putin due to a suspended prison sentence. A furious Navalny, who says the sentence was part of a fabricated case designed to thwart his political ambitions, responded by calling for an election boycott. That prompted the Kremlin to demand an investigation to determine whether his statement broke the law. On Wednesday, Navalny upped the ante, saying he and his supporters would organize nationwide rallies on Jan. 28 in 85 towns and cities, including Moscow and St Petersburg, to support his call for an election boycott. We refuse to call the reappointment of Putin an election, Navalny said in a statement on his website. We are not going to vote and will convince everyone around us not to vote. We are going to campaign (for a boycott) with all our might. A boycott could pose a problem for the Kremlin which is keen to ensure a high turnout in the election to help confer legitimacy on Putin s expected victory amid some signs of apathy among voters. Under Russian law, the time and place of rallies must be agreed with the authorities who have often declined to authorize them in the past, citing conflicting events or security concerns. When the opposition has gone ahead anyway, the police have broken up rallies by force and detained attendees. Polls show that Putin, who has led Russia for 18 years as either president or prime minister, is on course to comfortably win another six-year term, allowing him to rule until 2024, when he ll turn 72. The former KGB officer is running as an independent, a move seen as a way of strengthening his image as a father of the nation rather than as a party political figure. The ruling United Russia party, which he once led and which controls three quarters of seats in the lower house of parliament, has said it will support him, as will Just Russia, a pro-government center-left group. Allies laud Putin for restoring national pride and expanding Moscow s global clout with interventions in Syria and Ukraine. But Navalny says Putin has been in power too long and that his support is artificially maintained by a biased state media and an unfair system which excludes genuine opponents. Navalny has made a name for himself by successfully leveraging social media and conducting high profile corruption investigations into senior officials. He has also organized some of the biggest anti-government protests in years. Opinion polls, whose accuracy Navalny dismisses, put his support in single digits while giving Putin an approval rating of around 80 percent. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2151 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: One of the most insane things about Republican nominee Donald Trump is that even when he massively f*cks up, he can t help but brag about how smart and brilliant he is! This has been especially true when it comes to his shady tax returns, which he still refuses to release to the American people despite several promises to be transparent.If you watched the first presidential debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton last week, you saw Trump shamelessly boast about how smart he was for not paying federal income taxes. And after recent reports discovered that the business mogul hasn t paid taxes in almost two decades, Trump claimed to have brilliant , superior knowledge of America s tax codes, which allows him to manipulate the system to his advantage. Well, the truth is coming out now that an ex-accountant of Trump has come forward.Jack Mitnick, one of Trump s former accountants, has given an interview with Inside Edition that exposes another one of Trump s many lies. Mitnick was the accountant cited in the 1995 tax returns that were recently leaked, where Trump was shown to have lost a staggering one billion dollars in a year. According to Mitnick, Trump doesn t even know anything about taxes, even though he claims to. Mitnick said: I did all the tax preparation. He never saw the product until it was presented to him for signature I m the one who did all the work. This sounds exactly like typical Trump taking full credit for the hard work of other people. The only thing Trump did that was perhaps smart was to hire a savvy accountant and yet he continues to try and convince America that his knowledge of how the tax system works makes him the better presidential candidate. It s seriously pathetic!You can watch Mitnick s interview below, in which he exposes Trump as a lying fraud:Featured image via Spencer Platt / Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2152 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: If there s one thing that conservatives and Fox News want more than anything, it s for President Obama and his administration to fail. This has been their narrative since he took office, and they d love for him to follow through with what they ve been saying. Unfortunately for them, that s just not the case. The economy has recovered, more people have health insurance, Osama bin Laden was killed, marriage equality is the law of the land, credit card companies are better kept in check, and a deal for a nuclear-free Iran was reached on top of countless other achievements.On the latest edition of Traitor TV, Fox News seems rather upset that Obama and his administration are actually getting the job done. Five prisoners have just been released from Iran, four as part of a negotiation. One of the prisoners released is Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian who was held for more than 500 days in Iranian captivity. According to CNN: The release was arranged as part of a prisoner swap involving seven Iranians held by the United States on sanctions charges, the officials confirmed. The deal comes after more than a year of secret negotiations. This is a huge development, and also goes directly against the narrative Republicans have been touting during debates, and Fox News has been delivering for years. They ve insisted that President Obama is going to get us into war with Iran, but more and more evidence to the contrary keeps making itself known.And because they re technically a news media outlet, and not officially the media branch of the Republican party, Fox News Fox & Friends had to report these latest negotiated releases with Iran. However, by the looks on their faces, they don t seem thrilled to deliver the good news. After all, they ve just been proven to be the liars that they are, yet again. Video/Featured image: C&L | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2153 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Two More Hollywood Films For Men That Leave Today’s SJW Movies In The Dust Two More Hollywood Films For Men That Leave Today’s SJW Movies In The Dust Bob Smith
Bob Smith is a man in search of the truth. His favorite quotes are, "We're all fools on this earth, and I can be no different"; "I know it's true, I read it at the LIE-brary"; and "The truth is not misogynistic, it's just the truth". November 11, 2016 Culture
Today we are going to take a quick look at two epic Clint Eastwood films, one of which is a well-known, Western classic ( The Outlaw Josey Wales ). The other one is a little-known, under-the-radar gem, which showcases the psychotic insanity of the deranged Western female ( Play Misty for Me ).
Both of these superb RPO films will leave any red-pill male feeling wholly satisfied, shortly after viewing them, and, well, that’s what these movie reviews of your old Uncle Bob’s are all about, are they not…helping you find the bona fide gold nuggets amid the endlessly steaming piles of SJW Hollywood crap? Yes indeed.
So let’s get crackin’. 1. The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976 – Clint Eastwood, Chief Dan George, Bill McKinney, John Vernon)
Clint Eastwood directed and starred in this sweeping, extremely well-crafted, post-Civil War epic film, and the cinematography and direction are undeniably excellent. But Eastwood’s portrayal of the Southern-sympathizer, Josey Wales, who has a major score to settle after Union troops burn his house down and murder his wife and children, is in itself a major cinematic achievement.
Out for blood and taking no prisoners, Eastwood’s merciless Josey Wales thunders across the plains and prairies of the American West, blowing scores of Northern soldiers away in the process, as he makes a desperate dash towards Mexico, and what he hopes will be sanctuary. But Wales gets sidetracked along the way, collecting a stray dog and a few stray human beings as well, which proves that the only thing a man can truly count on in this life is change.
There’s a great scene early on in the film, involving Josey Wales’ partner in crime, Jaimie (played by Sam Bottoms), where he starts babbling incoherently, while faking a state of fever-induced delirium from underneath a blanket, as the two outlaws are confronted by a pair of backwoods yahoos who are looking to collect the bounty that has recently been placed on Wales’ head.
Here, we clearly see the behavior of the typical, frightened, woefully outmanned beta male, as character actor Len Lesser (who portrays the overmatched bounty hunter Abe) starts yapping and barking in a very loud voice, while jerking around excitedly, shortly after getting the drop on Eastwood’s alpha-male killing-machine.
If you’re an alpha male and you’re in good shape, you’ve undoubtedly seen similar beta-male behavior. Probably at a bar, when some paunchy beta asswit, who’s sitting with his cucked crew, has had one too many beers and starts cutting you down in a passive-aggressive manner, from your periphery, as he barks and yaps in an excited voice about how tough he used to be, or how he doesn’t need to lift weights to be a man, or how he doesn’t think it’s cool to wear tight shorts (a hostile barb born of envy, uttered because he feels his package is inadequate). Yup, you know the routine.
In the film’s wow-we-almost-had-a-gangbang scene, featuring a somewhat-turned-on Sondra Locke (see above photo; Locke portrays Kansas-born settler, Laura Lee), as she’s confronted in the back of a covered wagon and dragged outside by a group of lusty Comancheros, which was obviously a blatant exaggeration, because, as we already know, all rapes are committed by totally unattractive, deranged, horribly evil, light-skinned men who smell badly and have absolutely zero neck tattoos—“ E , ” etc.—Clint’s character comes riding to the rescue out of the hills and guns the would-be rapists down, which probably made SJWs and feminists at the time scream with unbridled outrage at the theater screen, “She was giving her consent ! Didn’t you see it ? It was in her eyes ! It’s her right to express herself sexually, with however many men she might choose ! Murderer! Creeper! Pussy-blocker !”
Unfortunately, just like today, there were feminists and SJWs aplenty back in 1976. Their numbers have been growing with a vengeance since roughly the mid-1960s, and after more than 50 years in the saddle, they still keep going round and round in circles, yelling preprogrammed buzzwords and catch-phrases, while unknowingly speeding up the destruction of freedom of speech, but hey, Uncle Bob, tell us something we don’t already know, and yeah, I’ll get back to the film review now.
My favorite scene in the movie occurs when Josey Wales (who, now that I think about it, is a bit of a white knight, hmm…), rescues a Native American woman who is about to be double-teamed against her will by a pair of drunken white trappers.
Eastwood’s mad-dog character ultimately gets the drop on the would-be bounty-collectors, and he blows them straight to hell in an impressive hail of gunfire, which, I’ll have to admit, is pretty darned cool in itself. I mean, that’s why we watch films like this, isn’t it – for the violence, and the babes, and the red-pill messages? Well, there are plenty of those to be had in this no-holds-barred, epic Western film.
Maybe I’m going to have to rethink this movie in terms of it being perceived as a wholly red-pill film. Clint’s character stepped up and stopped a potential gangbang, as well as a three-way, and nobody asked him to do it. So this might have been a sly, Hollywood warm-up for the series of blatant white knight films we see today, but I don’t really want to think that way about Clint, so I won’t. I’ll just gulp down a quick blue pill right now—ah, much better.
I mean, Clint played Dirty Harry Callahan, for chrissakes, in a film that I will hopefully be reviewing at a later date, if I don’t get hit by a truck driven by an illegal alien who’s sporting 20 arrests for murder while having no driver’s license; or lynched by a swarm of rabid SJWs who are on the hunt for any white male who isn’t a media CEO or a billionaire.
The film bogs down a bit after about the two-thirds mark, in my opinion, but it still gets high marks across the board in every other critical category. If you haven’t seen it, rectify that soon. You can’t miss by watching this top-drawer, RPO film for men. 2. Play Misty for Me (1971 – Clint Eastwood, Jessica Walter, Donna Mills)
Unless they are over-the-top, laughingly ridiculous, obviously fictional slasher films, red-pill movies like this one just don’t get made in Hollywood any longer.
When you think of Clint Eastwood, you usually think of Dirty Harry , or The Outlaw Josey Wales , or Unforgiven , or Gran Torino, but Clint made a few obscure films that were both solidly red pill, and truly excellent movies, although they’ve been swept under the rug and locked away in the film vaults by today’s liberal-leaning film-hiders.
In this well-directed, highly suspenseful thriller, Carmel-by-the-sea disk jockey, Dave Carver (Clint Eastwood) lives a freewheeling, alpha male lifestyle, regularly banging out an assortment of hot women who listen to his live jazz broadcasts on a nightly basis. Carver is living the dream, pounding most of the available hot babes, and thoroughly enjoying his rightfully appointed alpha male privilege (or is that white male privilege?…er…SJW moment there, sorry).
That is, until Jessica Walter’s psycho-stalker character, Evelyn, walks into his life.
Now, you may have encountered a few of these yourself. Or maybe it’s just me. Sometimes I think I have an invisible sign on my forehead that only the initiated can read, which proclaims, “If you’re hot and insane—I’m your guy.” But Clint Eastwood shows us exactly what it’s like to be pursed by an attractive, psycho, female stalker. From writing creepy notes to him in lipstick on his mirror, to cutting up his clothing, to attacking his cleaning lady in a fit of jealous rage, Clint’s disk-jockey character quickly begins to realize that he bit off a hell of a lot more than just pussy when he started banging actress Jessica Walter’s batshit-crazy Evelyn.
I’ve always had a feeling that actresses who were really good in these psycho roles, were just being themselves. But I could be wrong about that. (I was wrong once before—it was in the third grade and she didn’t really love me.) Be that as it may, Jessica Walters really brings her A-game in the role of the totally unhinged Evelyn. If you’ve ever had a relationship with a woman like this one, watching the film will send chills down your spine, and result in some serious flashback imagery.
(Have you ever done this—what Clint is doing in the above photo—namely, hold and comfort a crazy woman who somehow managed to weasel her way into your life, by skillfully turning you into both an enabler and a caretaker…if so, I definitely feel your pain. And I’ll bet Clint has experienced it a time or three himself, or he probably wouldn’t have done this film.)
Play Misty for Me is absolutely worth watching for myriad reasons; but the most important reason of all, I wholeheartedly believe, is because it will clearly demonstrate to you, in no uncertain terms, the subtle and overt signs that a man absolutely has to be able to recognize, in order to avoid being blindsided by a psychotic, unhinged female. And for that reason alone, it’s a must-see classic, no doubt about it; when Clint’s character ultimately gets revenge on his tormentor, at the very end of this excellent RPO film, you’ll feel all warm and fuzzy inside, too—and in a weird, viscerally satisfying way—which makes the whole experience just that much more gratifying.
By boycotting all modern SJW Hollywood cinema, you are sending a message to the power structure that is loud and clear—you are not being fooled by their deliberate attempts to poison people’s minds and socially engineer them to be pussified, dumbed-down, blue-pill-sucking robots.
Always research the plot lines of any films for which you are seriously considering buying a ticket, or renting on DVD. And if you smell an SJW rat, don’t spend your money. It’s that simple. In the end, it’s just like investigating a potential LTR candidate. You have to conduct your due diligence. Otherwise, you might just get taken for a ride. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2154 | 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 WaPo Headline Call IS Leader al-Baghdadi an 'Austere Religious Scholar'? Claim summaries: The Washington Post was criticized for an online obituary headline about al-Baghdadi.
contextual information: On Oct. 27, 2019, U.S. President Trump announced the death of Islamic State (IS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. As news outlets quickly reported on the terrorist leader's death, the Washington Post published an obituary that labeled al-Baghdadi an "austere religious scholar." Screenshots of this obituary headline were widely shared on social media, accompanied by criticism of the news outlet. Former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, for instance, posted the following message on Twitter: "Stop, read this & think about it: last night a ruthless, brutal terrorist who threatened our country and is responsible for the death of American citizens was killed in a successful operation by the U.S. military, and @washingtonpost described #Albagdadi as an austere religious scholar." This is a genuine headline that briefly appeared on Washingtonpost.com. An archived version of the article can be found here. The headline was on the Washington Post's website for about two hours. The story was published at 8:31 a.m. CDT, according to the article's timestamp. This headline was changed to "Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48" at about 10:35 a.m., according to archived links from the Internet Wayback Machine. Kristine Coratti Kelly, the vice president and communications general manager of Washington Post Live, posted a message on Twitter stating that the headline "should never have read that way." Regarding our al-Baghdadi obituary, she said, "the headline should never have read that way, and we changed it quickly." The qualms over the Washington Post's headline likely inspired a meme targeting another "mainstream media" outlet, CNN. Some social media users began sharing an image that supposedly showed a screenshot from a CNN broadcast about al-Baghdadi's death featuring the chyron "Trump Kills Unarmed Father of Three." For the record, while the Washington Post briefly published a headline for al-Baghdadi's obituary labeling him a religious scholar, the above-displayed chyron is a digital manipulation featuring a years-old image of Don Lemon that never aired on CNN. Warrick, Joby. "Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Extremist Leader of Islamic State, Dies at 48." The Washington Post. 27 October 2019. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2155 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: And why wouldn t he? The leftist comedy writer/actor with a net worth of $800 million, probably needs the money to feed all of the illegal aliens who live with him. Even though we don t have any proof that he has illegal aliens living with him, we re pretty sure every celebrity who speaks out against those who want to close our borders and deport illegals must be taking some personal responsibility for their welfare Right? Not likely Comedian Larry David is going to be picking up a $5,000 bounty for calling billionaire businessman and GOP presidential contender Donald Trump a racist on national TV.Earlier in the week, the DEPLORABLE group DeportRacism.com PAC offered a $5,000 reward to anyone who called Trump a racist on-air during Saturday Night Live.During the show s opening monologue with Trump flanked by cast members Taran Killiam and Darrell Hammond both made up as Trump David heckled the blustery businessman from offstage, repeatedly yelling, You re a racist. Trump s a racist. Asked by Trump why he was doing it, David replied, I heard if I yelled that, they d give me $5000. Despite being written as part of the opening, DeportRacism is making good on their promise. Via: Raw StoryAccording to a press release issued before the show was broadcast on the west coast, Luke Montgomery, campaign director for DeportRacism, said the PAC was excited to award the money to David.Here is a great piece entitled: Larry David Curbs His Enthusiasm:You may know Larry David as the writer and producer from Seinfeld. You may know him from Curb Your Enthusiasm. After his most recent New York Times piece, you ll know him as the guy who curbed his intelligence on liberalism:There is a God! It passed! The Bush tax cuts have been extended two years for the upper bracketeers, of which I am a proud member, thank you very much. I m the last person in the world I d want to be beside, but I am beside myself! This is a life changer, I tell you. A life changer!To begin with, I was planning a trip to Cabo with my kids for Christmas vacation. We were going to fly coach, but now with the money I m saving in taxes, I m going to splurge and bump myself up to first class. First class! Somebody told me they serve warm nuts up there, and call you mister. I might not get off the plane!The first rule of Fight Club is you never talk about Fight Club. The first rule for the Wealthy Elitist Liberal Club is you always talk about your money. The second? Find a way to feign indignation that the federal government isn t confiscating more of your earnings, without ever mentioning that there s nothing stopping you from turning it over to Uncle Sam.Larry David s Thanks for the Tax Cuts! is based on the false premise that the rich is a homogenous group of artists, namely successful Hollywood actors, writers, and producers who occupy their spare time on liberal guilt trips (wealthy Republicans don t count, as Hollywood liberals classify them as monsters).Larry would rather not think about the countless Subchapter S corporations and small mom and pop businesses that benefit from tax cuts because their success is rooted in creating widgets, gadgets, and services the world finds useful; his came about because he s sharp with sex jokes and awkward situations.Americans naturally do not begrudge someone for their success because the track record for the United States is stellar when it comes to upward economic mobility. Hard work, patience, sound judgment, and a pleasant demeanor tends to take Americans pretty far, which is why they need to be prompted to believe the rich boogeyman is out to get them. Smug, self-loathing Hollywood types like Larry David play the part well:This tax cut just might save my life. Who said Republicans don t support health care? I m going to have the blueberries with my cereal, and I m not talking Special K. Those days are over. It s nothing but real granola from now on. The kind you get in the plastic bins in health food stores. Did someone say organic ?Everyone already knows Larry has enough disposable income to fill his swimming pool with blueberries, just for a giggle, if he wanted. However, the point of Thanks for the Tax Cuts! was to let readers know that higher tax rates would be a pittance to him and his friends. The point is to rub readers noses in trips to Cabo and expensive organic foods they can t afford, in order to stoke the flames of class warfare liberalism needs to survive.It s not working, Larry. See the recent election results for more details.Americans are getting wise to resentment peddlers who seek to tax you until the day you die before taxing you and the gifts you sought to pass on to family, one more time as Rigor mortis kicks in. They know that it isn t the successful entrepreneurs and businessmen hurting the future prospects of a great nation, but Washington politicians addicted to kamikaze entitlement spending and private property power grabs.The liberal comedian Wanda Sykes once called Larry David Ass Man. After witnessing him try to sell tax hikes by inducing resentment, I couldn t agree more.Watch Larry David call Donald Trump a racist during the Saturday Night Live show that crushed the ratings. It s likely one of the high points in his career. What Larry David may not be able to comprehend in his narrow little world, is that if it weren t for Donald Trump agreeing to host SNL, no one would have even bothered to watch the dying show. Larry David should be thanking Donald for allowing him to appear on the same stage, instead of walking away from the show smugly pretending he had anything at all to do with the show s astronomical ratings. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2156 | 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: New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.
contextual information: New Jersey often ranks high on lists in categories ranging from beach quality to education.Unfortunately, according to Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald, the state tops another list one with a particularly dubious ranking.New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation and not by a little, Greenwald (D-Camden) said in an April 1 interview with Michael Aron on NJTVs On The Record. They are the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average.New Jersey having high property taxes isnt new. But are they more than double the national average? Greenwalds statement is largely on the money, PolitiFact New Jersey found.Lets first explain the source of Greenwalds data and how tax rankings are reviewed.Greenwald got his data from a 2009 list compiled by the business-backed Tax Foundation in Washington, DC. The 2009 data shows that New Jersey ranked number one in three key tax metrics: median property taxes paid on homes; taxes as a percentage of home value; and taxes as a percentage of income.Nick Kasprak, a Tax Foundation analyst and programmer, said taxes as a percentage of home value is the most relevant statistic of the three because it can apply to most people, ranging from those who own condominiums to those in McMansions.Its a good way of comparing apples to apples across the states, Kasprak said of the metric, adding that the Tax Foundations numbers are estimates and come from the U.S. Census Bureaus American Community Survey.So how long has New Jersey worn the highest property taxes banner?That depends on the metric. We found that New Jersey property taxes have topped the rest of the nations at least back to 2004 when looking at median property taxes paid on homes and taxes paid as a percentage of income.When looking at all three Tax Foundation metrics for years 2004 through 2009, New Jerseys median property taxes paid on homes was more than triple the national average; more than double the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of income; and at least one and-a-half times the national average for taxes paid as a percentage of home value.Brigid Callahan Harrison, a professor of political science and law at Montclair State University, said comparing states by property taxes alone is disingenuous because states fund certain needs differently. For example, some states use property taxes to fund education, others do not.In reality, we need to look in total at the entire tax burden, Harrison said. The implication is that New Jerseyans pay the highest taxes in the country, right? Thats what people think. What Im saying is that New Jersey pays a very high tax burden. What we need to do is look at the total tax burden: gas tax, sales tax, security, user fees, certainly property taxes and sales taxes as well.Jon Bramnick, leader of the Assembly Republicans, agreed property taxes are high but credited a slowing of their growth to Gov. Chris Christies implementation of a 2-percent property tax cap, changing arbitration procedures for police and firefighters, and other measures.We obviously have to have mergers, shared services and consolidations across New Jersey, Bramnick said, adding that a bipartisan effort is key. These are the factors that you have to have to continue down that road. If you do, you will see a slowing of property taxes.Our rulingGreenwald said in a TV interview that New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation, more than double the national average. He was referring to 2009 statistics from the Tax Foundation. Statistics from 2004 through 2008 show the state leads the nation in two of three key metrics, according to the Tax Foundation. New Jersey led in all three metrics in 2009. Greenwalds overall point is clear: when it comes to property taxes, New Jersey is king. We rate this statement True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2157 | 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 Thomas Paine Write, 'The Duty of a True Patriot Is to Protect His Country from Its Government'? Claim summaries: We recommend taking a few seconds to search Google for reliable sources before blindly sharing quote memes on social media.
contextual information: On September 14, 2022, a user on the Telegram social media platform shared a quote meme that claimed writer Thomas Paine once wrote, "The duty of a true patriot is to protect his country from its government." This quote was also widely shared on Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, and Truth Social. However, there is no evidence that Paine, who is perhaps most famous for his pamphlet titled "Common Sense," ever penned these words. The Thomas Paine National Historical Association published that the "true patriot" quote appears to have been derived from a sentence in Edward Abbey's book, "A Voice Crying in the Wilderness (Vox Clamantis in Deserto): Notes from a Secret Journal." The quote appears in bold below: Chapter 3: Government and Politics. The distrust of wit is the beginning of tyranny. In history-as-politics, the "future" is that vacuum in time waiting to be filled with the antics of statesmen. No man is wise enough to be another man's master. Each man is as good as the next, if not a damn sight better. A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. All forms of government are pernicious, including good government. Some of my ancestors fought in the American Revolution. A few wore red coats, a few wore blue coats, and the rest wore no coats at all. We never did figure out who won that war. Grown men do not need leaders. Democracy—rule by the people—sounds like a fine thing; we should try it sometime in America. The "true patriot" quote was wrongly attributed to Paine by at least two far-right Telegram accounts named Patriot Force and We the People Declare Freedom. The latter showed its purpose as centering around baseless conspiracy theories: "Go to this website and sign the petitions to take back our country and world from the DEEP STATE ACTORS." In addition to debunking the origins of the "true patriot" quote, the Paine association's website also shed light on four other quotes that they say did not originate with the author. When it comes to fake or misattributed quotes, we recommend doing a bit of research online to find out if the words and attribution are correct before deciding to click the share button. However, readers may have a difficult time researching quotes, as many websites that collect famous quotes do not ensure their words and authors are accurate. Unfortunately, such websites often appear at the top of Google search results. We recommend instead looking to online libraries, official institutions dedicated to preserving the legacies of famous people, books written prior to the birth of the modern internet, and other historical records. These sources are often more reliable than websites that do nothing other than collect quotes from famous people. 1776: Paine, Common Sense (Pamphlet) | Online Library of Liberty. https://oll.libertyfund.org/page/1776-paine-common-sense-pamphlet. Abbey, Edward. A Voice Crying in the Wilderness: Vox Clamantis in Deserto: Notes from a Secret Journal. Rosetta Books, 2015. Did Paine Write These Quotes? The Thomas Paine National Historical Association, https://thomaspaine.org/pages/resources/did-paine-write-these-quotes.html. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2158 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The left is officially ISIS ISIS terrorists have destroyed ancient sites that have been preserved for hundreds and hundred of years. Well, the left isn t too far behind them some jackwagon took a sledgehammer to a 225-year old monument to Christpher Columbus Unreal!The Columbus statue is in Baltimore Shame on these thugs!Baltimore Brew has this to say about the memorial:Baltimore s 225-year-old monument to Christopher Columbus, said to be the oldest in the country and the world dedicated to the explorer that is still standing, has been severely vandalized.In case you re wondering, this is happening in other places in America. We reported on two Catholic Saint statues that were vandalized and the Peace Monument in Atlanta that was also vandalized. Are you getting the picture now? It s not about the Confederacy but about hating anything America stands for. Our kids have been well taught by liberal academia so they only know that Imperialist America stole everything from everyone Yada, Yada, Yada,,,THIS IS A TURNING POINT Some jackwagon narrates the video: Christopher Columbus symbolizes the initial invasion of European capitalism into the Western Hemisphere. Columbus initiated a centuries-old wave of terrorism, murder, genocide, rape, slavery, ecological degradation and capitalist exploitation of labor in the Americas. That Columbian wave of destruction continues on the backs of Indigenous, African-American and brown people. Racist monuments to slave owners and murderers have always bothered me. Baltimore s poverty is concentrated in African-American households, and these statues are just an extra slap in the face. They were built in the 20th century in response to a movement for African Americans human dignity. What kind of a culture goes to such lengths to build such hate-filled monuments? What kind of a culture clings to those monuments in 2017? | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2159 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has said a transition period from the European Union after Britain s exit from the bloc in March 2019 must not last more than two years. In an interview with The Sun newspaper on Saturday, on the eve of the governing Conservative Party s annual conference, Johnson detailed four red lines for Brexit that appear to go beyond the agreed position of Prime Minister Theresa May s cabinet. In addition to a two-year maximum transition, he said the UK should not accept new EU or European Court of Justice rulings during transition, must not make payments for single market access when the transition ends, and should not agree to shadow EU regulations to gain access. Johnson also again strayed from his Foreign Office brief. He said Britain s current national minimum wage of 7.50 pounds an hour, rising to 9 pounds by 2020, was not enough , and called for public sector employees to get a pay rise, funded by layoffs. But he told the newspaper speculation about his leadership intentions had been massively overdone. Am I impatient about it (Brexit), do I want to get it done as fast as possible? Yes, absolutely. Do I want the delay to go on longer than two years? Not a second more, Johnson was quoted as saying in the tabloid newspaper. Some of Johnson s cabinet colleagues recently accused him of backseat driving on Brexit after setting out his vision for the UK s future outside the EU in a 4,300-word newspaper article just days before a key speech by the prime minister. In her speech in the Italian city of Florence on Sept. 22 May outlined a transition period of around two years of trading on the same terms, but no payments for single market access. The crucial thing I want to get over to Sun readers about Brexit is that it is going to be great and we need to believe in ourselves and believe we can do it. It is unstoppable, Johnson said in the article on Saturday. However, in an interview with The Times newspaper, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said that over optimism about Britain s future outside the EU sells people short and called for serious people to take charge of Brexit. At the Conservative party conference in Manchester, May will set out plans to build a road to a better future for Britain, hoping to head off a rebellion over her handling of Brexit and her poor showing in the June election. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2160 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WASHINGTON — Just days before Election Day, and with voters in many states already going to the polls, the F. B. I. director made a stunning announcement on Friday: Agents had discovered new emails that might be relevant to the completed investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private server, a case that she had seemingly put behind her in July. Never in recent history has the F. B. I. been so enmeshed in a presidential race. With a vague statement to Congress, the F. B. I. sent jolts through the campaign, leaving many voters unsure what to make of a case involving national security secrets, a disgraced congressman, racy text messages and a dispute among the country’s top law enforcement officers. Here’s what we know so far. What happened on Friday? The F. B. I. director, James B. Comey, sent a letter to Congress that said agents had uncovered new emails that could be connected to the Clinton investigation. That investigation had examined whether Mrs. Clinton and her aides had mishandled classified information by sending it through Mrs. Clinton’s private email server. The inquiry was completed in July with no charges filed. Mr. Comey said on Friday that agents would review the new emails to see whether they contained classified information. The letter was sent 11 days before the presidential election, and it set off fierce criticism of Mr. Comey for appearing to meddle in politics. The F. B. I. director’s letter did not reopen the Clinton inquiry, though some Republicans, including Donald J. Trump, characterized the move that way. Agents could open a new inquiry if they find evidence that the earlier investigation had been impeded or that classified materials had been intentionally mishandled. Where did these new emails come from? Mr. Comey did not say in his letter. But law enforcement officials briefed on the investigation said that agents had discovered the emails on a laptop owned by Anthony D. Weiner, the disgraced former congressman and estranged husband of Mrs. Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin. Last month, the F. B. I. began investigating allegations that Mr. Weiner had exchanged sexually explicit messages with a teenager. On Oct. 3, agents in New York executed a search warrant to obtain Mr. Weiner’s iPhone, an iPad and the laptop. Searching the laptop, they found evidence of a trove of emails similar to ones that had been examined in the Clinton investigation. Mr. Comey decided last week that agents should examine those emails to determine whether they contained national security information. That requires a court order, and officials said agents had not yet begun reading the emails. Why does the F. B. I. care if there is classified information in the emails? Under federal law, mishandling national security information is a crime, one that the F. B. I. is responsible for investigating. In 2015, the bureau began investigating the personal email account that Mrs. Clinton had used exclusively as secretary of state. As part of that investigation, the bureau tried to find every electronic device — phones, tablets, computers — that Mrs. Clinton and her aides used. Agents could not find many of them, including several of Mrs. Clinton’s cellphones and two iPads. The agents knew that those devices, and others they were not aware of, might someday surface. But they completed the Clinton case because they found no evidence that anyone had intentionally broken the law. The newly discovered emails may — or may not — provide new information to the F. B. I. Why did Mr. Comey send the letter? In July, Mr. Comey told Congress that the Clinton investigation was complete but that if new information came to light, the bureau would examine it. Mr. Comey pledged to be as transparent as he could with Congress about the investigation, and has since made public hundreds of pages of documents related to the inquiry. According to senior F. B. I. officials, Mr. Comey felt that he would be breaking his pledge of transparency to Congress if he did not reveal the new information from the Weiner case. And he believed that the bureau would be accused of suppressing details to benefit Mrs. Clinton — an accusation that he believed could do lasting damage to the F. B. I. ’s credibility. Who is upset with Mr. Comey for sending the letter? Many Democrats and even some Republicans have called the letter vague, troubling and unprecedented. Senior officials at the Justice Department urged Mr. Comey not to send the letter, saying it violated the spirit of longstanding policies not to discuss current investigations or do anything that could be seen as meddling in an election. In the letter, Mr. Comey said that the F. B. I. had yet to determine whether “this material may be significant,†and that he could not predict how long the review would take. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign has pushed Mr. Comey to release more information about the emails. Her campaign chairman, John D. Podesta, said that “by providing selective information, he has allowed partisans to distort and exaggerate to inflict maximum political damage. †What does all of this mean for Mrs. Clinton and her campaign? The short answer is that it is not yet clear. Polling on weekends can be unreliable, so it may be a few days before the effect of the development can be fully assessed. What is evident is that a campaign that has largely been a referendum on Mr. Trump — particularly since the first debate — is now not so . The email development will certainly matter, but the question is just how much. Twenty million people have already voted, and millions more have already determined whom they will support. The country was already politically polarized before this election, and opinions are overwhelmingly cemented about these two nominees. The email news could matter most in races. After being on the defensive for weeks because of Mr. Trump’s behavior, Republican candidates now have a more helpful news media environment in which to make their closing arguments. And Republican voters who are otherwise demoralized may have been given one final nudge to show up to the polls. What happens now? In the coming days, the F. B. I. will begin conducting a smaller version of the larger investigation it completed in July. Agents will go through the emails found on the laptop to determine whether they contain classified information. If so, the bureau will again look at the question of whether anyone intentionally committed a crime. Clinton campaign officials have said that Ms. Abedin gave the authorities all of the electronic devices that she believed had emails on them. Many of the newly discovered messages are likely to be duplicates of others that the F. B. I. has already examined, investigators say. The review will be conducted by the same F. B. I. agents who led the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails. F. B. I. agents are all but certain that it will not be completed by Election Day, and believe it will take at least several weeks. Neither Justice Department officials nor F. B. I. agents say they know what to expect from Mr. Comey over the coming days. Normally, investigations are conducted secretly, but Mr. Comey’s public remarks have opened him up to demands from both campaigns that he make as much information public as possible as soon as it is available. What’s the scenario for Mrs. Clinton and her aides? In July, Mr. Comey announced that the bureau had not found enough evidence to charge anyone with a crime for the mishandling of classified materials on Mrs. Clinton’s server. If the new emails indicate intentional efforts by her or her aides to move such information outside secure government systems, or if they tried to impede the earlier inquiry, the F. B. I. will most likely want to investigate further. But the bureau has just begun the process of combing through the new emails, and officials believe that at least some are duplicates of messages that have already been examined. How rare is it for the F. B. I. to make a development like this public? Extremely rare. At times during trials or after cases are closed, the F. B. I. finds new evidence and either discloses it to defense lawyers or reopens a case. An F. B. I. director has never made such a disclosure to Congress so close to a presidential election. How did Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Justice Department feel about Mr. Comey’s letter? Senior Justice Department officials tried to discourage Mr. Comey from sending the letter, saying that it would violate department guidelines that advise against talking about current criminal investigations or being seen as meddling in elections. They urged Mr. Comey not to do anything before Election Day, and they said he should tell Congress when agents had read the emails, understood whether they were relevant and could put them in context. They stopped short, however, of issuing a direct order prohibiting him from sending the letter. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2161 | 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 President Franklin Delano Roosevelt felt there wasnt a need in the public sector to have collective bargaining because the government is the people.
contextual information: Reaction was swift and strong after Republican Gov. Scott Walker said the curbs he enacted on the collective-bargaining power of public-employee unions were philosophically in line with principles espoused by President Franklin Roosevelt, the liberal Democratic icon. Walker drew the comparison ina July 29, 2013 speechat theGovernmental Research Association policy conferencehosted by Milwaukees Public Policy Forum. The governor, whose Act 10 law wiped away most subjects of bargaining for most public unions and shifted more pension and health-care costs to workers,arguedthe changes helped balance government budgets and made merit more important than teacher seniority in schools. We think it has a dynamic impact going forward on how we perform, and that is putting power in the hands of the people duly elected at the state and at the local level, Walker said. Its why -- some people are surprised to know this -- the position I pushed is not unlike the principle that Franklin Delano Roosevelt, not exactly a conservative, pushed as well when it came to public sector collective bargaining, Walker added. He felt that there wasn't a need -- and others like him, (former New York Mayor Fiorello) LaGuardia and others -- felt there wasnt a need in the public sector to have collective bargaining because the government is the people. We are the people. Did Roosevelt -- the patron of the post-Depression boost in organizing by industrial unions in the private sector -- really take the position that when it came to federal government employees, there wasnt a need to have collective bargaining? Before we check Walkers claim, lets stipulate the obvious: There are dramatic differences between Walker and the architect of the New Deal, from their approaches to governing in times of economic distress to their views on the proper size and role of the state. In the labor realm, when it came to private-sector unions whose cause he championed, FDR called collective bargaining a fundamental individual right. Walker, meanwhile, has not ruled out signing right to work limits on private-sector unions, though hes not pushing it now. Thats one reason the comparison so riled Democrats and union leaders. FDR brought us out of the Great Depression with strong investment in workers and jobs programs that worked, Wisconsin State AFL-CIO leader Phil Neuenfeldt said. Scott Walker is drowning in a jobs deficit and to compare himself to FDR is laughably delusional. But Walker in his speech made a claim on a very specific historical point: FDRs views on collective bargaining for public employees. And that is the claim we are examining. Where Roosevelt stood Compared to the mountain of evidence on FDRs sympathetic stance on protections and rights for private laborers, the historical record on his attitude toward public-sector unions is less than a few inches high. Walker cites an on-point and oft-quoted FDR letter that conservatives frequently highlight when arguing for limits on unions in the government sector. That letter, we found, dominates scholarly debate over Roosevelts views on this issue. And its easy to see why: The presidentsAug. 16, 1937 correspondencewith Luther C. Steward, the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, is bluntly worded -- to say the least. Roosevelt was responding to an invitation to attend the organizations 20th jubilee convention. In the letter, FDR says groups such as NFFE naturally organize to present their views to supervisors. Government workers, he observed, want fair pay, safe working conditions and review of grievances just like private-industry workers. Organizations of government employees have a logical place in Government affairs, he wrote. But Roosevelt then shifted gears, emphasizing that meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government. Then, the most-famous line and the one directly on point to Walkers comment: All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service, he wrote. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. Roosevelt didnt stop there. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations, he wrote. When Walker claimed FDR said the government is the people, he had Roosevelts next line in mind. The employer, Roosevelts letter added, is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters. Roosevelt concluded with a strong stance against strikes by unions representing government workers, noting that NFFEs bylaws rejected strikes. The letter, the FDRPresidential Library sitepoints out, was released publicly by the Roosevelt White House and became the administration's official position on collective bargaining and federal government employees. Roosevelt had previously laid out his views on public-sector unions at aJuly 9, 1937 news conference. His statements there add more weight to Walkers claim. A reporter directly asked Roosevelt whether he favored government employees joining unions to the extent of collective bargaining with the government. Roosevelts response made clear he thought managers should listen to worker concerns, whether raised by union representatives or not. Federal workers are free to join any union they want, he said. But he recalled that in 1913, when he was Navy assistant secretary, he told a union official the Navy would not enter into a contract with the union because it had no discretion under federal law. The pay is fixed by Congress and the workmen are represented by the members of Congress in the fixing of Government pay, Roosevelt said. His thinking then still applied, Roosevelt told the reporters in 1937. At the end of news conference, Roosevelt was asked, after making the point that Congress sets compensation: In other words, you would not have the representatives of the majority as the sole bargaining agents? Roosevelt: Not in the government, because there is no collective contract. It is a very different case. There isnt any bargaining, in other words, with the government, therefore the question does not arise. Taken together, the letter and news conference remarks positioned Roosevelt as deeply skeptical of the need and wisdom of collective bargaining power for unions in the federal system. When he wrote that the unique circumstances would make it impossible for government officials to make a binding deal on behalf of the government, that didnt leave a lot of ambiguity. Same with the phrase insurmountable limitations. What the scholars say Perhaps because of the strong wording of his views, the 1937 letter remains -- nearly 75 years later -- the best piece of evidence on this topic. Even scholars and union officials who chafe at Walker linking himself to FDR have acknowledged the letters significance. Roosevelt absolutely did not favor collective bargaining for federal workers and especially did not favor the right to strike, public-sector labor scholar Joseph McCartintold Salon.comshortly after Walkers dramatic action in 2011. And the current head of the National Federation of Federal Employees says Roosevelts words meant he believed that there should be no right to federal bargaining over wages and benefits. The union chief,William Dougan, told us Roosevelt feared that dealing with multiple unions could lead to pay disparities. To be sure, Roosevelts views were in part a product of his time. At the time, government unions had no collective bargaining rights, and it was not uncommon for elected officials to stand against union bargaining rights for government employees. Even in the private-sector, labor rights were still developing, their constitutionality still under debate in the courts. The notion of expanding those powers to the government sector had not yet taken hold -- and it would not under FDR. It wasnt until 1962 that President John F. Kennedysexecutive orderallowed bargaining, and then just over working conditions. Federal unions still cannot bargain over pay and benefits. Still, there are prominent scholarly voices who think Roosevelts 1937 letter has been misinterpreted, at least in part. One such voice is McCartin, theGeorgetown University history professorwho told Salon that Roosevelt absolutely did not favor collective bargaining for federal workers and especially did not favor the right to strike. When we asked McCartin about that interview, he said he had spoken prematurely. He and other historians note that Roosevelt wrote that collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. Historians and union officials have parsed the phrase for decades, debating its meaning, and sometimes disagreeing with each other. The phrase, some say, leaves open the possibility that Roosevelt supported a modified form of collective bargaining, different from what private workers had created. They note that in the letter, Roosevelt directed his opposition most specifically at the right to strike. Dougan, the union official,believes Roosevelt appeared opento bargaining over working conditions. Several scholars emphasize that Roosevelt later praised a union contract negotiated between the federally owned Tennessee Valley Authority and unions representing workers for the electric utility created by the federal government in 1933. The TVAs board, appointed by Roosevelt,chose as a matter of policyto recognize the unions and bargain with them. The TVA Act signed by Roosevelt did not direct or discourage such bargaining. TheTVAepisode is the only effective rebuttal offered to the words in FDRs letter, wrote Wilson R. Hart, a longtime labor relations adviser in the federal government who examined Roosevelts thinking on unions. Hart felt that the apparent contradiction between FDRs TVA comments and his 1937 letter strongly suggested that Roosevelt was not denouncing all elements of collective bargaining in the letter. How Walkers action compares Scholars, including McCartin, believe FDRs views might have evolved in favor of public sector bargaining -- and against what Walker did. We wont judge that for this item, but well end with a few observations regarding the two situations, separated by nearly three-quarters of a century. In substance, Walkers move dramatically limited, but did not completely end, collective bargaining by most public employees. His Act 10 allowed the state to cut benefits and try to limit pay increases. He argued that unions had become too powerful and that elected representatives of the people should have more control over taxpayer-funded compensation. Roosevelt said in the 1937 press conference that compensation levels for federal employees should be set by Congress and the president, not through bargaining with unions. So both men -- decades apart -- envisioned a limited role for unions in the public sector. But the differences in context make the two mens views hard to compare. Walker acted after 50 years of collective bargaining between the state and its employees -- in the birthplace of public collective bargaining -- while FDR expressed his views before labor won that toehold into that arena. Our rating Walker said FDR felt there wasnt a need in the public sector to have collective bargaining because the government is the people. The governor relies -- to good effect -- on Roosevelts 1937 letter, which, along with other primary evidence, lays out in striking language FDRs deep reservations about the need for and wisdom of public-sector bargaining. While Roosevelt was open to discussion with represented and unrepresented employees over working conditions, he seemingly had major concerns about a formal, contractual bargaining process. Scholars cite Roosevelts positive comments on the Tennessee Valley Authority labor contracts, and debate certain phraseology in FDR's writings, but its limited evidence compared to the clear impression left by the letter and press conference remarks. Roosevelt saw a logical place for unions in government affairs, but the most compelling evidence suggests he drew the line at collective bargaining with them. We rate Walkers narrow statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2162 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: An education watch coalition of grassroots parents and other citizens representing 27 states is letting the Senate know its concerns about education department secretary nominee Betsy DeVos. [With DeVos’ confirmation hearing rescheduled to begin January 17, members of Education Liberty Watch have sent a letter detailing their concerns to Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee chairman Sen. Lamar Alexander ( ) ranking member Sen. Patty Murray ( ) and the committee’s other members. “This national coalition of grassroots parent and citizen organizations has many questions and concerns about Betsy DeVos,†the group’s president, Dr. Karen Effrem, tells Breitbart News. “Chief among them is her apparent very recent conversion to opposing Common Core when her activist and philanthropic record shows concrete evidence of strong support for the standards over many years. †While, upon her nomination, DeVos launched a new website on which she stated she is “certainly†not a supporter of Common Core, she has served on boards and funded organizations that have been vocal supporters of the standards. Additionally, she has been strongly endorsed by former GOP presidential candidate and Common Core promoter Jeb Bush, his mother, former First Lady Barbara Bush, former GOP presidential nominee and “ †Mitt Romney, former education secretary William Bennett — who received compensation for promoting Common Core among conservatives, the Core Michigan Chamber of Commerce, and the Bill Fordham Institute, which has also promoted Common Core. “There is also great concern about her support of voucher programs imposing Common Core on private and potentially home schools, and extensive student data mining,†Effrem continues. “These concerns are especially acute given Trump’s encouraging and repeated promises to get rid of Common Core, protect privacy and decrease or eliminate the federal role in education. †Effrem summarizes the letter and the group’s concerns: 1) From all the evidence we can find, her statement when she was appointed on November 23rd was her very first against Common Core. Her statements and record via organizations that she has founded, funded, chaired, or on whose boards she has served and her political contributions have all been in support of Common Core and Core candidates. Her statement and her interview with Donald Trump focused on “higher standards†which is a euphemism for Common Core, even though there is abundant evidence that the Common Core standards are anything but high. 2) Her American Federation for Children group has been strongly in support of state voucher laws in Indiana and Louisiana or federal Title I portability that imposes or would impose Common Core on private schools via the federally mandated state assessments. The education savings accounts that she touts could well place government regulations on home schooling for “accountability†purposes. 3) Although a strong supporter of charter schools, it appears she has never financially supported classical charter schools like the Hillsdale model in her own home state, only charters that require the teaching and testing of Common Core. 4) The Philanthropy Roundtable that she chaired until her appointment put out a report that is strongly in favor of extensive data mining of children without transparency of what data is collected and who receives it or parental consent and never mentions the word “privacy. †5) We are also concerned about continued expansion of invasive, subjective social emotional learning programs at the federal level and need to know her position on those. “We strongly urge the Senate HELP Committee to closely question her about these critical issues,†Effrem says. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2163 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: How the hell can anybody call themselves intelligent when they re supporting Donald Trump? It s a question that baffles people who are able to think critically, able to read and comprehend both history and current events, and able to see through Trump s thin fa ade of know-it-all-ism and deep into what he is an ignorant, narcissistic, and dangerous conman.Trump supporters not only don t see this, they re happy that there s someone running for president that thinks exactly like them. Take Melanie Austin, of Brownsville, Pennsylvania. She thought her beliefs about Obama being a gay Muslim from Kenya and Michelle being transgender were just fringe beliefs right up until she started hearing similar stuff from Trump and other right-wing extremists.Now she knows she s right about all of this. You can t tell her that she s ignorant and dumb if she can t figure this out for herself. You can t tell her she s delusional. You can sit there with her, and countless others like her, and present facts, figures, charts, studies, and more, all from the most reputable sources there are, and prove that her lord and savior is wrong, and you ll still get shot down.There s more to this than the problem of confirmation bias. Austin gets much of her information from fringe right-wing blogs and conspiracy sites, but that s not all of it. Many of Trump s supporters are seriously too dumb to know they re dumb. It s called the Dunning-Kruger effect, and it s an unshakeable illusion that you re much smarter, and more skilled and/or knowledgeable, than you really are.People like Austin labor under the illusion that their knowledge about things is at least as good as, if not better than, the actual facts. For these people, though, their knowledge isn t just superior it s superior even to those who have intimate and detailed knowledge of the subject at hand. Trump himself has exemplified this countless times, such as when he claimed he knows more about ISIS than even our military generals do.His fans simply take his word for it, and believe that because he knows, they know. They are literally incapable of seeing that they don t know.To be sure, the Dunning-Kruger effect is present everyone all across the political spectrum, and indeed, in every walk of life. We all overestimate our abilities and knowledge somewhere. However, the effect is especially pronounced in people with limited intellectual and social skills: [P]eople who are unskilled in [intellectual and social domains] suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. So basically, yes, it s possible to be too dumb to realize you re dumb.In four separate studies, people who scored in the bottom quarter on tests involving everything from humor to logic, and even to grammar, grossly overestimated where they thought they would score. They averaged scores in the 12th percentile, while their average estimate of their own scores was the 62nd percentile.The researchers attribute that huge discrepancy to a literal inability to distinguish accuracy from error. Or, to put it another way, those who are the most lacking in skills and knowledge are the least able to see it.Take the case of McArthur Wheeler, a man who robbed two banks in 1995 and was caught rather easily. He thought he would get away with it because he rubbed his face with lemon juice, which is used in invisible ink. To test the theory that lemon juice would turn him invisible, he rubbed it on his face, took a Polaroid, and his face wasn t in the picture! So he thought he was safe from security cameras because he could make his face invisible.He was shocked when police caught him because of that, saying, But I wore the juice. He literally couldn t see the ridiculousness of that line of thought. David Dunning, one of the first to catalog the Dunning-Kruger effect (hence its name), has studied human behavior including voter behavior for decades. He penned an op-ed in Politico that explains why this effect is so pronounced in Trump s supporters: It suggests that some voters, especially those facing significant distress in their life, might like some of what they hear from Trump, but they do not know enough to hold him accountable for the serious gaffes he makes. They fail to recognize those gaffes as missteps. Again, the key to the Dunning-Kruger Effect is not that unknowledgeable voters are uninformed; it is that they are often misinformed their heads filled with false data, facts and theories that can lead to misguided conclusions held with tenacious confidence and extreme partisanship, perhaps some that make them nod in agreement with Trump at his rallies. Trump is completely inept, and his supporters are way too poorly-informed to know that he s inept, and too dumb themselves to know how dumb they are. That s why Trump s supporters are so sure they re smart and their president is smart that they won t listen to reason. The effect is strong in these people.Featured image by Mark Wilson/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2164 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 21st Century Wire says With the ongoing hysteria constantly spouting from the American mainstream media about alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election which saw Donald Trump elected as president of the United States, the world is still awaiting a single shred of real evidence to support the establishment s conspiracy theory. To date, none has surfaced. The intelligence community has said that this election was meddled with by the Russians in a way that frankly is not particularly original. They ve been doing this for an awfully long time, and we are decades into the Russians trying to undermine American democracy, CIA chief Mike Pompeo told MSNBC s Hugh Hewitt in an exclusive interview that aired Saturday, June 24.Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, has made a noteworthy response to Pompeo s comments.via Russia InsiderTranslation: We could not but take note of and comment on the June 24 statement by CIA Director Mike Pompeo during his NBC interview. The statement dealt with Russia s alleged long time attempts to undermine the American democracy and meddling in the US elections. It appears that in his opinion Russia s longtime attempts to undermine the US democracy have culminated in the interference in US elections. As we know the issue of Russia s meddling in the election process has become a favorite media story and an obsession in the United States. This story has been adopted by anti-Russia propagandists. This issue continues to pick up momentum and is mentioned in statements by officials who are trying to accuse Russia of engaging in unlawful actions but who have failed to produce any evidence to date.We would like to remind them about some outstanding pages of US history. Unlike the Americans, we have real facts at our disposal, and we know what we should focus on. It is common knowledge that since the early 1990s the United States had voiced its intentions to establish a Jeffersonian democracy in Russia. But the very fact of setting such a task completely runs counter to the ideas of Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the American nation and democracy. All of us know he called for respecting various forms of government, chosen by other nations and said the United States would not impose its will anywhere. He was mistaken. Thomas Jefferson referred to the idea of dictating the form of government to an independent country as arrogant, brutal and outrageous.It appears that the ideologists of the present-day America have very poor knowledge of their own history and the foundations of their statehood, if the concepts of exporting democracy and humanitarian intervention have become their favorite method for conducting an aggressive foreign policy as part of their national concept. For decades, dozens of countries all over the world have been suffering from US-imposed sate system formulas they are trying to equate all countries under one and the same pattern, without any consideration for what makes each of them unique. This policy and experiments cannot be called harmless. In the past few years Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Syria and Ukraine have fallen prey to this concept. Needless to say, al-Qaeda in all its manifestations, ISIS and other radical terrorist groups of all religious denominations evolved on the fertile soil created by the Americans and in fact often were the brainchildren of these forces.Generous financial injections in the form of projects and grants through numerous foundations and NGOs is another grey zone through which the United States has been trying to influence political processes all over the world for many years. Russia virtually tops the list of these allocations. Various government and non-government organizations, including the Peace Corps, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and many other similar agencies, have been planting their agents for decades in order to penetrate the Russian political establishment and media community and to influence public opinion. According to some sources, the US has spent 5 Billion dollars for these purposes in the 1990s alone. It is very strange that, while making such statements, Mr. Pompeo forgets that many decisions stipulating the allocation of funding were approved by his own agency. It is strange that Washington forgets the fact that in the run-up to the 1996 Russian presidential election, the Federal Reserve bank delivered $500 million in cash to the US Embassy in Moscow under a far-fetched pretext of avoiding frenzied demand during the exchange of old $100 notes. Operatives from the CIA s Moscow Embassy station, headed by Michael Sulick, virtually slept on the money bags, while guarding them. Foreign-made cars delivered small batches of money from the Embassy to certain individuals.Who did the US sponsor using this money? I believe we will also learn this someday. I do not mean our assumptions, everything is clear here Well will know the specific names, dates and so on. Here are only a few examples of diverse US activities aiming to undermine stability in various regions worldwide and in those areas that are not ready to follow American instructions. We are in no way demanding that Mr. Pompeo should stop his rhetoric because this is in the realm of fiction. One should simply understand that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. We are ready. READ MORE RUSSIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Russia FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2165 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. Republicans on Tuesday fell short yet again in their seven-year drive to repeal Obamacare, in a bitter defeat that raises more questions about their ability to enact President Donald Trump’s agenda. The party was unable to win enough support from its own senators for a bill to repeal the 2010 Affordable Care Act and decided not to put it to a vote, several Republicans said. The bill’s sponsors vowed to try again, but face steeper odds after Sunday, when special rules expire that allow them to pass healthcare legislation without Democratic support. “We basically ran out of time,†said Senator Ron Johnson, a co-sponsor of the measure with Senators Bill Cassidy, Lindsey Graham and Dean Heller. Republicans have now repeatedly failed to deliver on their longtime promise to roll back former Democratic President Barack Obama’s signature domestic accomplishment. They have yet to achieve any major domestic policy successes in Congress this year, which could hurt their efforts to retain control of the Senate and House of Representatives in the November 2018 congressional elections. Republicans widely view Obamacare, which provides coverage to 20 million Americans, as a costly government overreach. Trump vowed frequently during the 2016 election campaign to scrap it. Democrats have fiercely defended it, saying it has extended health insurance to millions. After falling short in July, Senate Republicans tried again this month with a bill that would have given states greater control over the hundreds of billions of dollars that the federal government spends annually on health care. As before, they ran into objections from members on the right and the center who opposed repeal for essentially opposite reasons. Senator Susan Collins, a moderate, complained it undermined the Medicaid program for the poor and weakened consumer protections. Senator Rand Paul, a conservative, said it left too many of Obamacare’s regulations and spending programs in place. Democrats said it was time for Republicans to work with them to fix Obamacare’s shortcomings, and Republican Senator Lamar Alexander said he would resume talks with Democratic Senator Patty Murray to shore up the law’s insurance subsidies. Shares of healthcare providers ended broadly higher. Hospital company HCA Healthcare Inc rose 1.8 percent, while insurer Centene Corp, which focuses on Medicaid, rose 2.2 percent. The insurance industry, hospitals, medical advocacy groups such as the American Medical Association, American Heart Association and American Cancer Society, the AARP advocacy group for the elderly and consumer activists opposed the latest bill. Trump said on Tuesday his administration was disappointed in “certain so-called Republicans†who did not support the bill. The Republican president said later he still had not given up hope that the law would eventually be repealed. “It’ll happen,†he told reporters while traveling to New York for a fundraiser. Republicans hold a slim 52-48 majority in the Senate and at least three senators | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2166 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: By many measures, Chobani embodies the classic American immigrant success story. Its founder, Hamdi Ulukaya, is a Turkish immigrant of Kurdish descent. He bought a defunct yogurt factory in upstate New York, added a facility in Twin Falls, Idaho, and now employs about 2, 000 people making Greek yogurt. But in this contentious election season, the extreme right has a problem with Chobani: In its view, too many of those employees are refugees. As Mr. Ulukaya has stepped up his advocacy — employing more than 300 refugees in his factories, starting a foundation to help migrants, and traveling to the Greek island of Lesbos to witness the crisis firsthand — he and his company have been targeted with racist attacks on social media and conspiratorial articles on websites including Breitbart News. Now there are calls to boycott Chobani. Mr. Ulukaya and the company have been taunted with racist epithets on Twitter and Facebook. Fringe websites have published false stories claiming Mr. Ulukaya wants “to drown the United States in Muslims. †And the mayor of Twin Falls has received death threats, partly as a result of his support for Chobani. Online hate speech is on the rise, reflecting the rising nationalism displayed by some supporters of Donald J. Trump, who has opposed resettling refugees in the United States. “What’s happening with Chobani is one more flash point in this battle between the voices of xenophobia and the voices advocating a rational immigration policy,†said Cecillia Wang, director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. Chobani and Mr. Ulukaya declined to comment for this article. The Trump campaign did not reply to a request for comment. Mr. Ulukaya arrived in upstate New York in the 1990s to attend school. By 2002, he was making and selling feta cheese inspired by a family recipe. A few years later, he learned that a local yogurt and cheese factory that had closed was for sale. He received a loan of $800, 000 from the Small Business Administration to purchase the factory, and started selling Chobani yogurt in 2007. As the business grew, Mr. Ulukaya needed more help. When he learned there was a refugee resettlement center in a nearby town, he asked if any of the newcomers wanted jobs at Chobani. Mr. Ulukaya provided transportation for the new hires, and he brought in translators to assist them. He paid the refugee workers salaries above the minimum wage, as he did other workers at the factory. When Chobani opened its factory in Twin Falls, Mr. Ulukaya once again turned to a local resettlement center. The company now employs resettled refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan and Turkey, among other countries. “The minute a refugee has a job, that’s the minute they stop being a refugee,†Mr. Ulukaya said in a talk he gave this year. Today, Chobani has annual yogurt sales of around $1. 5 billion. Last year, Mr. Ulukaya signed the Giving Pledge, promising to give away a majority of his fortune to assist refugees. Chobani and the other companies working with refugees are not exploiting them, said Jennifer Patterson, project director for the Partnership for Refugees, a federal program. “It’s the exact opposite,†Ms. Patterson said. “These companies are looking to provide resettled refuges with the ability to live happy and productive lives. †Chobani’s work with refugees went largely unnoticed until this January, when Mr. Ulukaya spoke at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. His message — that corporations needed to do more to assist refugees — broke through the rhetoric. “He was quite a sensation there,†said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, who attended the event. “Here was someone who went beyond the chatter of Davos and was walking the walk. †Cisco, IBM, Salesforce and more joined others in pledging assistance to refugees. Those companies and others began working with the Tent Foundation, which Mr. Ulukaya founded last year. Chobani has pledged to help other companies learn how to effectively integrate refugees into a work force. But while an alliance of companies was now working together on the issue, the online critics zeroed in on Chobani. Shortly after Mr. Ulukaya spoke in Davos, the website WND published a story originally titled “American Yogurt Tycoon Vows to Choke U. S. With Muslims. †Then this summer, Breitbart, the conservative news website whose former executive chairman, Stephen K. Bannon, is now running the Trump campaign, began publishing a series of misleading articles about Chobani. One drew a connection between Chobani’s hiring of refugees and a spike in tuberculosis cases in Idaho. Another linked Chobani to a “Twin Falls Crisis Imposed by Advocates. †A third conflated Chobani’s hiring practices with a sexual assault case in Twin Falls involving minors. As Breitbart began publishing its articles, the online attacks grew more intense. On Twitter and Facebook, users called for a boycott of Chobani. An image was widely shared on social media that claimed Mr. Ulukaya was “going to drown the United States in Muslims and is importing them to Idaho 300 at a time to work in his factory. †And bloggers fabricated stories claiming that Chobani was pressuring local officials “to facilitate their multitude of Muslim requests. †Soon the mayor of Twin Falls, Shawn Barigar, found himself at the center of a conspiracy theory. “It got woven into a narrative that it’s all a that we’re all trying to keep the refugees safe so that Chobani has its work force, that I personally am getting money from the Obama administration to help Chobani hire whoever they want, that it’s part of this Islamification of the United States,†he said. “It’s crazy. †As the online comments escalated this summer, Mr. Barigar and his wife received death threats. Breitbart said it was simply covering the news. “Breitbart has been a leader in delivering important and breaking news on refugee crises throughout the Western world, which pose both national security and financial risks,†Alex Marlow, editor in chief, said in a statement. “Mr. Ulukaya hasn’t merely involved himself in this issue, he’s been one of the leaders in expanding refugee resettlement in the United States. Breitbart’s explosive growth is due in large measure to the mainstream media’s refusal to cover vital topics like this one. †But civil rights advocates said they believed it was no mystery why Mr. Ulukaya was targeted while other chief executives had been spared. “It’s because he’s an immigrant himself,†Ms. Wang of the A. C. L. U. said. Mr. Roth of Human Rights Watch attributed some of the xenophobia directed at Chobani to the election season. “Some people are feeling left behind, and some people are concerned about terrorists,†he said. “But Trump has given a voice to these sentiments. †Mr. Barigar, a Democrat, concurred. “Donald Trump really fueled a sentiment about immigration that is shared by a very small part of our community,†he said. “We are an agricultural center. We’ve depended on immigrants for a or more. †Mr. Ulukaya appears undeterred. In September, he participated in a discussion with President Obama and business leaders on how corporations could do more to help refugees. And his work with refugees is part of a broader suite of initiatives. He recently gave 10 percent of Chobani shares to his employees, and he is offering paid parental leave to all employees. “He’s the xenophobe’s nightmare,†Mr. Roth said. “Here’s an immigrant who isn’t competing for jobs, but is creating jobs big time. It runs completely counter to the narrative. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2167 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: America does not protect freedom of speech. It has declared an information war on Russia, but already is feeling that it is losing it. It is so surprising for America itself that the authorities of it are going to ‘fights without rules’ against Russian media on their territory and are demanding strict legal restrictions for the work of our journalists in the United States. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2168 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Good morning. (Want to get California Today by email? Here’s the .) Today’s introduction comes to us from Jennifer Medina, a national correspondent based in Los Angeles. “We’re going to be living with Obamacare for the foreseeable future,†Paul Ryan, the Republican speaker of the House announced minutes after the legislation to repeal the law collapsed in Congress last week. Now some political leaders in California want to go even further. Last month State Senators Ricardo Lara and Toni Atkins introduced legislation to replace private health insurance with a publicly funded health care system run by the state government known as a system. The bill does not include any details of how the state would pay for the multibillion program, instead simply declaring “it is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would establish a comprehensive universal health care coverage program and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the state. †Gov. Jerry Brown, who is both a fiscal hawk and an ardent supporter of Affordable Care Act, has already spoken about his skepticism of a program, saying it would be prohibitively expensive. But at least one candidate running for governor next year plans to make universal health care a centerpiece of the campaign. Earlier this month Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom said he was working with health care experts to craft a plan for a system. While he was mayor, the city approved a plan to offer universal health care for all of its residents. Mr. Lara said the Republican defeat in Congress could pave the way for a system. “It’s easier to expand health care than make up lost ground as we would have had to do,†he said. “We really have the chance to make universal health care a reality now. †The proposal differs from existing programs in one big way: It would include all residents, regardless of their immigration status. Obamacare explicitly excluded undocumented immigrants from benefits of the program, though children in California can receive basic coverage even if they are undocumented. Advocates of a program argue that it would bring down costs and encourage preventive care. But opponents say there would be less choice and efficiency in medical care, and that taxes would rise significantly for all residents. This is not the first time state leaders have pressed for a bill. Similar legislation was passed in 2006 and 2008, though it did not include a way to pay from the system. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill. Do you think California should move to a system? Email us your thoughts at catoday@nytimes. com. (Please note: We regularly highlight articles on news sites that have limited access for nonsubscribers.) • Representatives Adam B. Schiff and Nancy Pelosi of California suggested that Representative Devin Nunes should recuse himself from an investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. [The New York Times] • Mr. Nunes and Mr. Schiff could not be more different. [Opinion|Los Angeles Times] • California’s attorney general, Xavier Becerra, has forcefully criticized Mr. Trump. But in office, he has taken a more measured approach. [The Sacramento Bee] • Leaders across Southern California said they would continue to protect people who are in the country illegally despite a warning from Attorney General Jeff Sessions. [Los Angeles Times] • New research shows that fault zones formerly thought to be separate make up one continuous system running through San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles counties, making a bigger earthquake more likely. [The New York Times] • The Raiders are leaving Oakland — again. The team’s move to Las Vegas was approved by the N. F. L. [The New York Times] • East Bay officials are exploring options to sue the Raiders and possibly the N. F. L. after the decision. [San Francisco Chronicle] • The N. F. L. makes two demands of its owners: Build stadiums with as many public dollars as you can find and never, ever feel shame. [Michael Powell | The New York Times] • A fire on the third floor of a residential building in Oakland killed at least three people and displaced more than 100. [SFGate] • Los Angeles County officials are considering imposing tolls on more car pool lanes in an effort to speed up traffic on the region’s freeways. [Los Angeles Times] • Bill Croyle, the state’s top water manager, said Monday that the Oroville Reservoir will have a new spillway in place to prevent potentially dangerous outflows of water by Nov. 1. [SFGate] • Uber resumed testing its cars in San Francisco Monday after a crash in Arizona briefly halted the program. [The Mercury News] • A Los Angeles man caught a carp in MacArthur Park Lake. [LAist] The National Park Service purchased Santa Rosa Island in 1986 from the Vail Vickers ranch. In 1998, cattle ranching on the island ended for good. But some vestiges of the island’s ranching past still remain. Alana Ayasse, a graduate student studying geography at Barbara, took the above picture on the island in September, while volunteering for a week with Channel Islands Restoration, a nonprofit that helps tend to the health of plants and animals in the park. She came across the horses while walking back to a field station one evening. “You can just see them wandering up there,†Ms. Ayasse said in a phone interview Monday. “They’re supercool. †Ken Owen, the executive director of Channel Islands Restoration, said the horses were kept to a portion of the island where they would not harm any rare plants. “They’re literally a cultural artifact,†he said. “And there’s really no reason to remove them. †Want to submit a photo for possible publication? You can do it here. California Today goes live at 6 a. m. Pacific time weekdays. Tell us what you want to see: CAtoday@nytimes. com. California Today is edited by Julie Bloom, who grew up in Los Angeles and graduated from U. C. Berkeley. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2169 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. Vice President Joe Biden praised Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for tapping into Americans’ concerns about growing income inequality, potentially giving the Vermont senator a boost as he gains on rival Hillary Clinton weeks before the Iowa caucuses. Sanders has argued that he is a more authentic choice to be the party’s nominee as he tries to undermine Clinton’s double-digit lead in national polls by gaining ground in the important early nominating states of Iowa and New Hampshire. In an interview with CNN on Monday night, Biden said Sanders’ focus on the growing gap between the very rich and other Americans has struck a chord with voters. “Bernie is speaking to a yearning that is deep and real and he has credibility on it,†Biden said. “And that is the absolute enormous concentration of wealth in a small group of people with the new class now being able to be shown being left out.†He said Clinton, who is campaigning in Iowa on Tuesday, had not focused on income inequality as long. “It’s relatively new for Hillary to talk about that,†Biden said. “Hillary’s focus has been other things up to now and that’s been Bernie’s. No one questions Bernie’s authenticity on those issues.†On Tuesday, Biden said that was not a criticism of Clinton, a former U.S. secretary of state. He told NBC’s “Today†show that her focus had rightly been on foreign policy, while income inequality had long been Sanders’ “mantra.†“Even when income inequality wasn’t as serious as it is today, it was his drumbeat,†Biden said. “She’s coming up with some very good ideas but Bernie is pushing the envelope on this.†The Biden interviews came before President Barack Obama’s final State of the Union address on Tuesday night. While Clinton has a large national lead in the polls, she has struggled to make solid gains in Iowa and New Hampshire, which hold outsized influence on the election process. On Tuesday, a Quinnipiac University poll showed Sanders climbed to 49 percent in Iowa, a 5 percentage point lead over Clinton going in to the Feb. 1 caucuses. He widened his lead in New Hampshire by 14 points, a Monmouth University poll said. The polls had an error margin of 4.4 and 4.8 points, respectively. Biden was courted by some Democrats to seek the presidential nomination but declined, citing family obligations after his son Beau Biden died of cancer last year. Within the party, concerns remain whether Clinton can overcome a lack of enthusiasm among voters. Biden also told CNN that he and Obama want to influence the presidential nominees in November’s White House election, especially on gun control. Clinton has increasingly criticized Sanders for past votes that were viewed favorably by the National Rifle Association. Biden said Sanders is making improvements to his position. “What Bernie Sanders has to do is say that the Second Amendment says | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2170 | 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 a Michigan State Senate Candidate Defend Men Having Sex with Underage Girls? Claim summaries: A Michigan state senate candidate said his Facebook account was hacked and a series of troubling posts were the result of an attempt to sabotage his political career.
contextual information: A Michigan businessman abandoned his State Senate campaign in early February 2018 after making derogatory Facebook comments about the judge who sentenced osteopath Larry Nassar in a case involving the sexual abuse of hundreds of American gymnasts. Michael Saari of Walled Lake, Michigan, faced backlash for comments posted days after Judge Rosemarie Aquilina sentenced Nassar to a cumulative 175-year prison sentence on multiple counts of sexually abusing young girls in his care. As part of a Facebook discussion in response to the sentencing, Saari wrote: "The judge was wrong for her personal vocal opinions on record... That should be a crime against jurisprudence itself... Lastly, what do you think this feminazi judge would say if her husband asked for a BJ?" Saari deleted his Facebook account, but several observers managed to keep a record of this exchange by taking screenshots of his controversial posts. Saari originally told WWJ that he could not recall writing the comments, saying, "I post a lot." However, he later admitted that he posted the remarks in an interview with local ABC affiliate WXYZ, saying, "Yes, absolutely." Saari doubled down on his criticism of Aquilina but said he should have chosen a different way to articulate his views: "If I were to do it all over again, I probably would not have used such derogatory terminology." Facebook users also uncovered several troubling earlier posts he appears to have published, including one from 2016 in which he seems to defend adult men marrying and having sex with pre-pubescent girls. According to several screenshots, the posts included the following comments: "Women [sic] don't seem to understand that from the very beginning of time, men have taken young girls (prior to periods) as wives and concubines. Even the Bible talks of this, so don't make it sound like men that are attracted to 12-year-old girls are sick... It's you women [sic] that can't get a grip on reality that's what's sick... It's only normal, and you can't change normal or a person's DNA..." In a 1 February interview with a Michigan-based Patch site, Saari denied having written those words. According to Patch, Saari said he believed someone had fabricated the screenshots and added, "I've never made those comments. It's not my character." On 5 February, however, Saari told us by phone that although the post was authentic and was published by his Facebook account, it was the result of a hack and that he personally did not write it: "When I ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2014, my Facebook was hacked... The biblical thing [the post about young girls] did not come from me." However, the post in question was published in 2016. When we asked Saari whether his Facebook account had remained hacked for two years, he replied, "From what I can understand, yes," adding, "I'm not a computer guy." Ian Bancroft, a financial advisor and, like Saari, a fishing enthusiast, took part in the 2016 Facebook exchange and told local Fox News affiliate WJBK, "It was definitely him," adding, "It was a weekly occurrence for him to comment obscenities on news articles or in a lot of the fly fishing groups that were racist comments, things like that." For his part, Saari told us he does not defend or support the practice of adult men marrying or having sex with pre-pubescent girls: "Absolutely not. If I had a daughter, I think I'd go berserk if anyone was even looking at my daughter." Saari said he believed the post was designed by hackers to portray him as a "child molester" and thereby inflict the maximum possible damage on his political career: "The Democrat party or whoever it was who sabotaged my campaign knew there could be nothing heavier than that." It didn't end there. Facebook users have also condemned a series of posts from Saari's account that contained racially charged, derogatory language and appeared to support racial segregation. In one 2016 post, Saari appeared to speculate that an African-American U.S. Navy veteran who runs a Michigan fishing non-profit was a "butler," and in another, he sent the same man a diatribe in which he castigated black people for "struggling to imitate and shadow" what Saari called "white people activities." Saari denied writing either of these posts and attributed them to the alleged hacking of his account. He told us the "butler" post "was the first time I suspected my computer had been hacked," after he received messages from Facebook friends asking whether he had really written the derogatory post himself. When asked, the former candidate told us he supported racial equality, saying, "I'm a Christian. I'm no better than a Filipino or a black person or an Indian." When asked if he supported racial mixing, Saari said, "I don't advocate racial mixing; I'm not advocating it. I've never given it a whole lot of thought." On the right to marry a person from a different race, Saari told us his position was, "If they're in love, it doesn't matter. I don't care if they're gay, lesbian, black, or white. I don't care. People have the freedom to do what they want to do. This is America." When asked, Saari said he had not notified Facebook that he believed his account had been hacked and told us the damage to his reputation was so extreme that such efforts would be a waste of time. He added, "There's nothing I can do to redeem my name in politics." Three months later, Saari seemingly admitted he had made the Facebook post about sex with pre-pubescent girls that he had previously denied (his comments on the matter were far from clear) and maintained that he had not, in fact, dropped out of the state senate race. In the end, Saari lost the August 2018 Republican primary by an overwhelming 90-10 margin. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2171 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 100% FED Up! was able to easily find evidence about the anti-American, cop-hating, racist who attacked Trump during a rally on Sunday. Either the mainstream media news organizations don t have any investigative journalists working for them, or they prefer to hide the truth about Trump s attacker. We believe the latter is true.An even bigger question is how this radical cop hating, white hating (self-loathing) Bernie Sanders supporter is able to jump on the stage of the GOP Presidential front-runner, grab him, scuffle with the US Secret Service and only be charged with two misdemeanors? Watch new video that was just released of Tommy DiMassimo rushing to get at Trump on stage here:CNN interviewed Thomas (Tommy) DiMassimo, the man who was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct and inducing panic after he rushed the stage at an Ohio Trump rally on Sunday.During the interview, Tommy DiMassimo explained to CNN that he just wanted to take the podium away from the GOP presidential front-runner to send a message. CNN never asked him a single quesiton about his past or his support for Bernie Sanders.It s almost as though CNN was giving Tommy DiMassimo, a Wright State University senior, a platform to express his dissatisfaction with Donald Trump. They wouldn t do that for someone who just committed a crime by rushing the stage of the top GOP Presidential candidate would they?https://youtu.be/RIAEQonBgO0Here is the real truth about the soft-spoken Tommy DiMassimo that appeared in the CNN video who was worried about Trump being a bully. We found these videos on YouTube that were co-written by the Wright State University senior. The name of the video is Red Black and Blue. The video appears to be promoting a Revolution featuring blacks killing cops and of course, cops killing innocent blacks.***LANGUAGE and VIOLENCE Warning***Here is the first shocking trailer for DiMassimo s movie Red Black and Blue :https://youtu.be/R8dgSibelNQHere is the second violent trailer. The video in its entirety can be found below:https://youtu.be/PEP4hWfHzj8Here are tweets that were sent out by Tommy DiMassimo just prior to the Ohio Trump rally where he rushed the stage. In the first tweet, he talks about becomig a martyr. The second tweet talks about getting into a Trump rally and slapping fire into Trump. From the Urban dictionary: The art of slapping fire out of a person is to give said person an intense slap that will leave their face red for an extended period of time. That sure sounds a LOT differnt that the non-violent explanation he gave CNN. The last tweet with the gun and smiley face emoji was sent to fake black guy, Shaun King. You be the judge of what he s trying to say in his tweets below.And of course, the fact that he s a Bernie Sanders supporter should come as no surprise:Folks in OHIOGo vote for Bernie and or Not Trump il ragazzo (@Younglionking7) March 13, 2016This tweet was posted in Sept, 2015. The most recent tweets (seen above) have all been deleted.DiMassimo posts a picture of a bloodied cop seen in the film on his Facebook page. One of his friends asks in the comment section, Is that you? He doesn t respond.This picture was taken from DiMassimo s facebook page advertising his one man show on Wright College campus.Here s DiMassio hanging out with a few sweet boys in the neighborhood:Oh, the irony of DiMassimo looking to the police officer for help when he was concerned about a concealed carrier, after spending the afternoon taunting the Confederate flag supporters, and actually burning a Confederate flag in front of them at a GA rally (see below):Open Carry Activist Prepares to Draw Gun on Counterprotester at Yesterday's Confederate Flag Rally in #GA #p2 #tcot pic.twitter.com/cNuEKHXmF6 CSGV (@CSGV) August 2, 2015Hero of the Day burns Confederate flag and waves it at 500 idiots at Stone Mountain. pic.twitter.com/iBzwN3ElcK Derf Backderf (@DerfBackderf) August 3, 2015Here s a video showing the controversy DiMassio created when standing on an American flag on campus:Here is the video of the actual event. Watch the disrespect this punk has an elderly veteran confronts him:https://youtu.be/Q0Kwcp2DLFoIf you can stomach it, here is the violent full-edition of the video co-written by Tommy DiMassimo, the intelligent, bright, college senior :Tommy DiMassimo is sadly, representative of many of the whiny, anti-American students we see supporting Bernie Sanders and a Black Lives Matter terror movement today. Black Lives Matter was created to threaten and intimidate Americans into giving them not equal treatment, but special treatment. Our hateful and divisive President is responsible for the groundswell of support for hate groups like this that are popping up across colleges, universities and large cities across America. The reason they are trying so hard to prevent a Trump presidency is because they fear he will call them out and expose them for their self-serving agenda. Their only hope to keep this radical movement going is to elect Bernie Sanders or Hillary. Trump is the only person who they fear is an obstacle standing in the way of their goal.We ll never know how far Tommy Massimo would have gone if he was allowed to get ahold of Trump on the stage. One thing is clear though, his ridiculous punishment and the special treatment he was given by CNN will certainly not dissuade the next radical from attempting to harm Trump at one of his public events.Here is a screen grab that shows DiMassimo as one of the co-writers of the Red Black and Blue video. Although we can t prove it, given his flair for drama, it is highly likely DiMassimo is one of the actors in the violent cop and white-hating film: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2172 | 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 Charles Lieber Arrested for Selling the COVID-19 Coronavirus to China? Claim summaries: The arrest of a Harvard professor fueled conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 coronavirus disease outbreak in 2020.
contextual information: Editor's Note: On Dec. 22, 2021, Charles Lieber was convicted of making false statements to federal authorities about his involvement with the Chinese government and for failing to report foreign financial accounts to the IRS. You can read more about Lieber's case here. The original story continues below. read more about Lieber's case here On Jan. 28, 2020, Harvard professor Charles Lieber was arrested and charged with making a materially false statement to federal authorities about receiving funding from China. arrested Lieber's arrest was big news in academic circles; but after internet users noticed that the alleged funding was coming from a university in Wuhan, China, the center of an outbreak of a new coronavirus, wild speculation went viral and unfounded connections were drawn between Lieber and a conspiracy theory that the coronavirus was a lab-made bioweapon. wild speculation unfounded connections A viral Facebook post took it further, relaying more details about Lieber's arrest and making use of some conveniently placed scare quotes: post In case you missed it, today, Federal Agents arrested Dr. Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University's Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, with lying to the Department of Defense about secret monthly payments of $50,000.00 paid by China and receipt of millions more to help set up a chemical/biological Research laboratory in China. Also arrested were two Chinese Students working as research assistants, one of whom was actually a lieutenant in the Chinese Army, the other captured at Logan Airport as he tried to catch a flight to China - smuggling 21 vials of "Sensitive Biological Samples" according to the FBI. Oh, almost forgot. The research lab the good professor had helped set up? Its located at the Wuhan University of Technology. Wuhan China is ground zero to the potentially global pandemic known as the Coronaviruswhich is both spreading rapidly and killing people. This is Stephen Coonts international spy novel stuff happening in real life - and it has barely made the news. The claims made in this Facebook post are generally true. Lieber was truly arrested in January 2020 for lying to federal agents about funding he had allegedly received from China. However, Lieber's arrest was not connected to the coronavirus and there's no evidence to support claims that this disease was a human-made bioweapon. Let's take a closer look and separate the facts from the rumors in this case. In short: Lieber was arrested for lying to authorities about his involvement with a Chinese government program to recruit and cultivate scientific talent. Lieber was the Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University and the Principal Investigator of the Lieber Research Group. Because this group had received grant funding from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD), Lieber was required to disclose any funding he received from foreign governments or entities that could lead to a conflict of interest. The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges in its complaint that Lieber became a "strategic scientist" at Wuhan University in 2011 and that he was a contractual participant in China's Thousand Talents Plan, a government program aimed at recruiting and cultivating high-level scientific talent. The DOJ says that Lieber was arrested for lying to investigators about his involvement in this program and his affiliations with WUT: DOJ Chinas Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruit plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of Chinas scientific development, economic prosperity and national security. These talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information. Under the terms of Liebers three-year Thousand Talents contract, WUT paid Lieber $50,000 USD per month, living expenses of up to 1,000,000 Chinese Yuan (approximately $158,000 USD at the time) and awarded him more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at WUT. In return, Lieber was obligated to work for WUT "not less than nine months a year" by "declaring international cooperation projects, cultivating young teachers and Ph.D. students, organizing international conference[s], applying for patents and publishing articles in the name of" WUT. The complaint alleges that in 2018 and 2019, Lieber lied about his involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan and affiliation with WUT. On or about, April 24, 2018, during an interview with investigators, Lieber stated that he was never asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program, but he wasnt sure how China categorized him. In November 2018, NIH inquired of Harvard whether Lieber had failed to disclose his then-suspected relationship with WUT and Chinas Thousand Talents Plan. Lieber caused Harvard to falsely tell NIH that Lieber had no formal association with WUT after 2012, that WUT continued to falsely exaggerate his involvement with WUT in subsequent years, and that Lieber is not and has never been a participant in Chinas Thousand Talents Plan. In short: The DOJ announced three separate arrests in January 2020. The first was Lieber. The second involved Yanqing Ye, a lieutenant in the Chinese army accused of stealing U.S. research. And third was Zaosong Zheng, who stole 21 vials of biological research. While these three arrests all involve people lying about their ties to China, they took place at different universities and are not related. On Jan. 28, 2020, the DOJ announced the arrests of three different individuals in three separate cases related to China. announced Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, was arrested this morning and charged by criminal complaint with one count of making a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement. Lieber will appear this afternoon before Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler in federal court in Boston, Massachusetts. Yanqing Ye, 29, a Chinese national, was charged in an indictment today with one count each of visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy. Ye is currently in China. Zaosong Zheng, 30, a Chinese national, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2019, at Bostons Logan International Airport and charged by criminal complaint with attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research to China. On Jan. 21, 2020, Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements. He has been detained since Dec. 30, 2019. Yanqinq Ye, a lieutenant of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA), the armed forces of the Peoples Republic of China and member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), reportedly lied about being a "student" on her visa in order to attend Boston University. The DOJ alleges that Ye conducted research and assessed military websites while studying at BU's Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering and sent U.S. documents and information to China. Zaosong Zheng was arrested at Logan Airport as he was attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research that he allegedly stole from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. In short: Cancer cells. As news of Zheng's arrest circulated on social media, some made the unfounded claim that these vials of "biological research" were somehow connected to the coronavirus. According to The New York Times, however, these vials contained cancer cells: The New York Times Inside his checked luggage, wrapped in a plastic bag and then inserted into a sock, the officers found what they were looking for: 21 vials of brown liquid cancer cells that the authorities say Mr. Zheng, 29, a cancer researcher, took from a laboratory at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. While some conspiracy theorists assumed that Zheng's plan involved a bio-weapon, Zheng told authorities that he planned on using the samples to further his career: Under questioning, court documents say, Mr. Zheng acknowledged that he had stolen eight of the samples and had replicated 11 more based on a colleagues research. When he returned to China, he said, he would take the samples to Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital and turbocharge his career by publishing the results in China, under his own name. In short: There is no evidence that coronavirus was human-made and several leading researchers have debunked this notion. While this conspiracy theory has started to receive some mainstream attention (it was even pushed by Republican Sen. Tom Cotton), there is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, several researchers have debunked this claim, calling it illogical and noting that the current evidence indicates that the coronavirus mutated naturally. debunked Trevor Bedford of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle stated at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Seattle that There is no evidence whatsoever of genetic engineering that we can find. The evidence we have is that the mutations [in the virus] are completely consistent with natural evolution. stated Two more researchers gave statements to The Washington Post: The Washington Post Theres absolutely nothing in the genome sequence of this virus that indicates the virus was engineered, said Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University. The possibility this was a deliberately released bioweapon can be firmly excluded. Vipin Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said it is highly unlikely the general population was exposed to a virus through an accident at a lab. We dont have any evidence for that, said Narang, a political science professor with a background in chemical engineering. Its a skip in logic to say its a bioweapon that the Chinese developed and intentionally deployed, or even unintentionally deployed, Narang said In short: No. Lieber's arrest (as well as the two other cases) was related to economic and academic espionage. There's no indication that Lieber's research, arrest, or connection to China was related to the spread of the coronavirus. Lieber was arrested in January 2020 for allegedly working with a university in China to further the country's recruitment and development of scientific talent. While Lieber was reportedly working with a lab in Wuhan, China (it should be noted that Lieber allegedly started working with the Wuhan University of Technology 9 years before there would be an outbreak of coronavirus in the area), there's no evidence to suggest that this is anything more than a coincidence. Lieber's arrest, as well as the two other cases brought by the DOJ in January 2020, dealt with an academic battle between the U.S. and China. Lieber was allegedly working with a Chinese recruitment program, Ye was allegedly attempting to steal United States research and documents, and Zheng's was attempting to steal biological samples. FBI Boston Division Special Agent in Charge Joseph R. Bonavolonta said in a statement that all three of these cases dealt with "economic espionage" and China's attempts to steal trade secrets: statement Chinas goal, simply put, is to replace the United States as the worlds leading superpower, and theyre breaking the law to get there. Massachusetts is a target-rich environment with world-class academic institutions, research facilities, hospitals, cleared defense contractors, and start-ups. And each and every one of them are in danger of having their research, development, and investments stolen right out from under them. The ruling Communist Party of the PRC wants what we have so they can get the upper hand on us. And while we are still confronted with traditional spies seeking our state secrets, often working under diplomatic cover, or posing as everyday citizens, I can tell you China is also using what we call non-traditional collectors such as professors, researchers, hackers and front companies. All three individuals charged today are manifestations of the China threat ... Make no mistake, the ruling Communist Party of the Peoples Republic of China is highly strategic in their approach, and we are deeply concerned about American innovation, research, and cutting-edge technologies ending up in the wrong hands ... Economic espionage and the theft of trade secrets significantly hurts our academic institutions, businesses, jobs, and consumers, resulting in hundreds of billions of dollars in losses every year. While some may find these arrests to be suspect, the Department of Justice made no mention of coronavirus or biological warfare in their complaints. Cookson, Clive. "Coronavirus Was Not Genetically Engineered in a Wuhan lab, Says Expert."
Financial Times. 13 February 2020. Stevenson, Alexandra. "Senator Tom Cotton Repeats Fringe Theory of Coronavirus Origins."
The New York Times. 17 February 2020. U.S. Department of Justice. "Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases."
28 January 2020. Shaw, Jonathan. "Stolen Research: Chinese Scientist Is Accused of Smuggling Lab Samples."
Harvard Magazine. 28 January 2020. Barry, Ellen. "Stolen Research: Chinese Scientist Is Accused of Smuggling Lab Samples."
The New York Times. 31 December 2020. Barry, Ellen. "U.S. Accuses Harvard Scientist of Concealing Chinese Funding."
The New York Times. 28 January 2020. Updated [22 December 2021]: Editor's note added after Lieber was convicted of making false statements to federal authorities about his involvement with the Chinese government and for failing to report foreign financial accounts to the IRS. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2173 | 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 the Ohio man who labeled COVID-19 as a 'Political Ploy' the one who perished from the illness? Claim summaries: John W. McDaniel of Ohio passed away at the age of 60 in April 2020.
contextual information: Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.
In April 2020, a set of screenshots supposedly showing comments from a "John McDaniels," in which he called COVID-19 a "political ploy" and social-distancing measures "bullshit," started to circulate on social media. Along with the posts were articles claiming he died from complications of the coronavirus disease.
McDaniel truly died from complications related to COVID-19 in April 2020 after he downplayed the seriousness of the disease on social media. The New York Daily News wrote: An Ohio man has tragically died from COVID-19 after criticizing his state's coronavirus lockdown. John W. McDaniel, 60, died Wednesday in Columbus, exactly one month after reportedly calling Gov. Mike DeWine's stay-at-home order madness. "If what I'm hearing is true, that DeWine has ordered all bars and restaurants to be closed, I say bullshit! He doesn't have the authority," McDaniel reportedly wrote in a since-deleted social media post that circulated widely. As screenshots of McDaniel's posts went viral, many social media users took the opportunity to criticize him, saying he had received his comeuppance for calling the virus a political ploy.
McDaniel's wife, Lisa, acknowledged that her husband had made some "early assumptions" about the virus on social media but added that social media users were also making unfair assumptions about him. In a statement posted to the Snyder Funeral Homes Facebook page, which announced that services for McDaniel would not be live-streamed due to concerns about unwanted, negative social media reactions, she explained that McDaniel, like many others, was initially not fully aware of the severity of the pandemic. However, she wrote that he ordered the employees at his company, O&M, to work from home on March 16 (the day after the above-displayed Facebook post). Furthermore, according to her Facebook message, he self-isolated as soon as he was made aware that he had been in contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19.
Lastly, she wrote that if he were still alive, he would have abided by the state's stay-at-home order and would have encouraged others to do the same. Here's her statement from April 22, 2020 (emphasis ours): "Words do not describe all of the emotions we, John W. McDaniel's family, are experiencing right now. We are overwhelmed with grief for the loss of our beloved husband, father, soon-to-be father-in-law, son, brother, uncle, and dear friend to many. Similar to thousands of people, we are suffering from an unexpected and untimely loss due to the effects of COVID-19, the likes of which we never could have imagined. During this time of mourning, John's story, along with early assumptions that he stated on Twitter and Facebook, have turned into national news. The news has opened the floodgates for people to share their own misguided anger and unfounded assumptions about a man they don't know. Wanting to protect my family and John's legacy, we have decided not to live stream his funeral services via Facebook today. We will be privately recording his services today, and we will be sharing it directly with his family and friends. We have not come to this decision lightly, and we hope everyone will honor and respect this decision.
As each day passes, we all are learning more about this "invisible enemy." We have all learned that the early actions taken by our national and state government were indeed the right actions to take. Quarantine and social distancing have been effective in flattening the curve. John, President of O&M, ordered the company to work from home on March 16. In addition, it is important to note that John immediately self-isolated as soon as he learned he had been in contact with someone who had tested positive. Many, like John, made statements early on not fully aware of the severity of COVID-19; many have retracted their statements knowing now the effects of this pandemic. We know if John were still here with us, he would acknowledge the national crisis we're in, abide by the stay-at-home order, and encourage family and friends to do the same. But sadly, he is not with us, and we will forever have to live and cope with how his life ended far too soon. Further, we will never be able to erase from our hearts and minds the negative posts that have been made and shared about John this past week. To all of our family and friends, my sons and I will never be able to appropriately say "thank you" for all the love and support you have given us throughout this entire process. From the bottom of our hearts, we will forever be grateful for you and the special relationship we share.
While some may cast aspersions on McDaniel for not treating COVID-19 with the seriousness it deserved in March 2020, it should be noted that misinformation has been rampant during this pandemic. We've debunked scores of rumors over several months that have touted bad medical advice and promoted conspiracy theories. U.S. President Donald Trump, too, has been criticized for downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19 and has repeatedly called the news outlets covering this pandemic "fake news." On Feb. 28, just two weeks before McDaniel posted on social media that COVID-19 was a "political ploy," Trump said during a rally that "Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus" as their "new hoax." | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2174 | 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 Alleged Capitol Rioter Kevin Seefried a 'Registered Democrat and Biden Supporter'? Claim summaries: Seefried was photographed brandishing a Confederate flag inside the halls of Congress. Claims that he is a secret Biden supporter are sorely lacking in evidence.
contextual information: In January 2021, Snopes received several inquiries from readers about the accuracy of a widely shared meme that claimed Kevin Seefried, a Delaware man charged with taking part in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-U.S. President Donald Trump, was in fact a registered Democrat and supporter of President Joe Biden. Seefried came to the attention of the FBI after photographs showed him carrying a Confederate flag inside the halls of Congress. The meme consisted of one of those photographs, along with the following text: "This 'domestic terrorist,' who brought a Confederate flag into the Capitol during this outrageous attack on America has been arrested in his home state of Delaware. His name is Kevin Seefried. He's a registered Democrat and Biden supporter. Is Pelosi going to impeach Biden now too?" The popularity of the meme can be seen in the following screenshot, which shows just a selection of Facebook posts containing it: Facebook posts As evidence in support of the claim that Seefried is a registered Democrat, some Facebook users cited a listing for a "Kevin D Seefried" on the website VoterRecords.com: listing However, the only credible evidence available strongly indicates that Seefried is a supporter of Trump, who took part in a destructive effort to overturn the lawful and legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election, which Biden won. In court filings, an FBI special agent wrote that Seefried had said he traveled from Delaware to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 "to hear President Trump speak." Furthermore, the only supposed evidence presented in support of the claim that Seefried is a registered Democrat and Biden supporter is fatally flawed. The voter registration listing came from an unofficial source, and in any case referred to a voter born in 1986, and therefore decades younger than Seefried, who is 51 years old. Since we don't have voter registration information for Seefried, we can't definitively say that he is not a registered Democrat, and so we are issuing a rating of "Unproven." However, the available evidence strongly indicates that, whatever his voter registration might be, Seefried acted in support of Trump and took part in an effort to overturn Biden's legitimate victory hardly in keeping with the meme's baseless description of him as a "Biden supporter." The Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, which led to several deaths, damaged the reputation of the movement spearheaded by Trump to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election using baseless conspiracy theories that falsely alleged widespread electoral fraud. widespread electoral fraud As a result, some Trump supporters attempted to distance that movement from the events of that day, falsely claiming that the attack had been planned or perpetrated by left-wing agents provocateurs, in particular antifa (short for "anti-fascist"). We have addressed and debunked several strands of that conspiracy theory, and the "Biden supporter Seefried" meme appears to be just another such example. addressed debunked several strands On Jan. 14, Seefried and his 23-year-old son Hunter were charged with the following three offenses each: charged An affidavit written by an FBI special agent stated that: both Seefried and his son were captured on video breaking into the Capitol through a broken window; that Hunter Seefried had cleared glass from that semi-broken window in order to clear a path for entry; and that once inside, Seefried brandished a Confederate flag through the halls of the Capitol. affidavit According to the FBI affidavit, the two men were identified because of a tip-off from one of Hunter's co-workers, who claimed Hunter had bragged about his participation in the attack on the Capitol. The co-worker also recognized Hunter's face from a police flier requesting information from the public about persons of interest from the riot. According to the FBI, both men confirmed their involvement in the attack on the Capitol during interviews conducted on Jan. 12. The affidavit states that Kevin Seefried told federal agents he had travelled from Delaware to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 in order to hear Trump speak at a rally at the Ellipse, near the White House, and that he had subsequently marched from the Ellipse to the Capitol. Seefried reportedly told the FBI he had brought the Confederate flag with him from Delaware, where it normally flies outside his house. Worcester County, Maryland court records list Kevin Seefried's month and year of birth as March 1969, meaning he was 51 years old when he was charged. The address listed in those records is located in Laurel, Delaware, and matches the location of his family home, which the Delaware News Journal visited and described in a Jan. 15, 2021 report. report The same residential address is found in Worcester County court records for Hunter Seefried, and those records list his month and year of birth as November 1997, meaning he was 23 years old when charged. Given that Kevin Seefried is 51 years old, he could not be the same individual listed as a registered Democrat on VoterRecords.com the only piece of supposed evidence put forward to support the claim that Seefried is a secret Biden supporter. However, Seefried's actual voter registration information, if it exists, was not readily available, so we cannot definitively rule out the possibility that he is registered as a Democrat, notwithstanding his current political views. Snopes contacted attorneys for both Kevin and Hunter Seefried, in an effort to clear up those uncertainties, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. If we receive information that clarifies Seefried's voter registration status, we will update this fact check accordingly. For now, we're issuing a rating of "Unproven." | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2175 | 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 Celebrities Dine at a Cannibal Restaurant in Los Angeles? Claim summaries: A more-creative-than-usual junk news piece claimed that Katy Perry, Meryl Streep, and Chelsea Clinton have dined on human flesh.
contextual information: The Los Angeles restaurant scene offers tourists and locals the chance to eat in the dark, do a juice cleanse, and sneak your way into a secret courtyard by walking through a freezer. According to a 10 January 2018 fake news article, it also affords some elites -- namely Meryl Streep, Chelsea Clinton, and Katy Perry -- the opportunity to dine on human flesh: dark juice freezer article What do Katy Perry, Meryl Streep, Anderson Cooper and Chelsea Clinton have in common? They have all eaten human flesh at LAs notorious cannibal restaurant, Cannibal Club. The private restaurant has long operated under the radar in Los Angeles, with rumors circulating about who has attended and what is really served behind closed doors. Now a leaked Cannibal Club document has exposed some of the notorious restaurants elite patrons. The Cannibal Club does not exist. Your News Wire based their article on two components: first, a fake "Cannibal Club" web site, which has been online since at least 2009; and second, a "leaked" document purportedly listing Streep, Clinton, and Perry as members. web site The "staff" photographs on cannibalclub.org all come from stock photo web sites. Whoever designed the site used a photograph labeled "Beauty at her forties" for Elspeth Blake, the supposed proprietor; "Beatnik Nick" as the photograph for "Art Director" Hero Conners; and "Japanese woman in a tank top" for "Service Manager" Raven Chan. The photograph purportedly showing Chef de Cuisine Sophie Laffite is also an iStock photograph that was once used on an auto insurance web site: staff Beauty at her forties Beatnik Nick Japanese woman in a tank top auto insurance The web site also promotes a regular Friday and Saturday night show (the same event has been listed on the web site since 2009), but does not provide any information about where the supposed restaurant is actually located. The FAQ section attempts to explain this by saying that "it is necessary for us to operate privately and to vette [sic] our members in order to avoid disruption from the less enlightened." Yet, we're doubtful that this club could have a permanent (or even roving) physical location where they host concerts while simultaneously avoiding detection from the authorities for nearly a decade. FAQ authorities For the Your News Wire story cover image, the site used images of Katy Perry, Meryl Streep and Chelsea Clinton over a photograph purportedly showing The Cannibal Club. The image actually shows a restaurant in Spain called the "Cannibal Raw Bar." And no, they don't serve human meat there either. Cannibal Raw Bar either The only "evidence" Your News Wire provides of Streep, Perry, and Clinton's supposed membership at this nonexistent club is a single document uploaded to Scribd: Scribd: There's no evidence that this "leaked" document actually came from a cannibal club in Los Angeles. Rather, it was likely created using digital editing software. This is at least Your News Wire's second attempt to tarnish Katy Perry's reputation by connecting her to cannibalism. The web site, which has a long history of publishing false information, posted a fake news story in November 2017 claiming that the singer had revealed that she had an appetite for human flesh. history fake news | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2176 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement Thursday marked a decisive win for Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, as reported by the New York Times. [From the Times: advertisement | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2177 | 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: According to Ted Cruz's tax proposal, businesses are required to pay a 16 percent tax on their earnings as well as on the wages they distribute to their employees.
contextual information: Ted Cruzs tax plan, envisioningtax returns that fit on postcards, would whack businesses twice over, Marco Rubio says. We wondered about that. In the Jan. 14, 2016, Fox Business Network Republican presidential debate in North Charleston, S.C., Sen. Rubio of Florida said that under the plan advocated by Sen. Cruz of Texas, businesses basically will have to pay a tax, both on the money they make, but they also have to pay taxes on the money that they pay their employees. A moment later, Rubio said Cruzs plan does not eliminate the corporate (income) tax or the payroll tax. Businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Cruz disputed that characterization, saying in part that a critical piece that Marco seems to be missing is that this 16 percent business flat tax enables us to eliminate the corporate income tax. It goes away. Cruzs plan replaces the corporate income tax, the payroll tax and others with a flat tax. Does it also make businesses pay 16 percent on profits and payroll, as Rubio said? Cruzs plan outlined After emailing Rubios campaign about how he reached his 16 percent conclusions, we turned to Cruzs tax plan asoutlined by his campaign. Under the Simple Flat Tax, Cruz says on a campaign webpage, the current seven rates of personal income tax will collapse into a single low rate of 10 percent. For a family of four, the first $36,000 will be tax-free. The Child Tax Credit will remain in place, Cruz proposes, and the plan revamps the earned-income tax credit while preserving deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments. Heres the flat-tax postcard as envisioned by Cruz: SOURCE:Web page,The Simple Tax Plan,Ted Cruz presidential campaign (viewed Jan. 20, 2016) Next up: the 16 percent element. On Cruzs website, we spotted no direct indication the 16 percent would apply to payroll spending. For businesses, Cruz says there, the corporate income tax will be eliminated. It will be replaced by a simple Business Flat Tax at a single 16 percent rate. The current payroll tax system will be abolished, while maintaining full funding for Social Security and Medicare. Cruz further says the business flat tax will be based on revenues minus expenses such as equipment, computers, and other business investments. In general, Cruz says, his proposed tax overhaul will deliver a tremendous economic boost, according to the well-respected Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit thatdescribes itselfas a leading independent tax policy research organization. Independent breakdowns We fetched the foundationsOctober 2015 analysisof Cruzs plan which, the foundation said, would replace the corporate income tax and all payroll taxes with a 16 percent Business Transfer Tax, or subtraction method value-added tax. In addition, his plan would repeal a number of complex features of the current tax code. Farther along, the analysis spelled out a payroll aspect. Specifically, the foundation said, Cruzs plan: Enacts a broad-based, 16 percent Business Transfer Tax or value-added tax. This tax is levied on all business profits, less capital investment. This would include the payroll of business, government, and nonprofit institutions, as well as net imports. The tax would exempt from taxation the purchase of health insurance. A business transfer tax is also often known as a subtraction-method value-added tax. While its base is identical in economic terms to that of the credit-invoice VAT seen in many OECD countries, it is calculated from corporate accounts, not on individual transactions. The foundation also said: Under current law, some taxes on labor are explicitly levied on nominal wages, reducing take-home pay, while others are implicitly passed on to workers through lower nominal wages. The business transfer tax would also fall substantially on payrolls, but it would do so entirely through implicit reductions in nominal wages rather than explicit reductions in take-home pay. Thats a bit gobbledy-gooky for us. A foundation official, Kyle Pomerleau, told us by phone and email that what Rubio said largely holds up, though it would be wrong to conclude businesses under Cruzs plan would pay 16 percent on the same money twice. That is, Pomerleau elaborated, Cruzs plan eliminates the existing payroll tax, which is 15.3 percent of wages (half of that paid by employers, the other half by employees), but the plan counts payroll expenditures as part of net business profits, which are taxed at 16 percent. Even though his plan gets rid of the payroll tax, Pomerleau emailed, his new Business Flat Tax will end up taxing that payroll by disallowing its deduction at the business level. Another authority, Joe Rosenberg of theUrban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us by phone that Rubio was accurate about Cruzs plan presuming he meant what most people define as profit by his phrase what you make. Rosenberg walked us through how he sees Cruzs plan working: Say a business buys something for 50 cents at wholesale and has to pay its employees 50 cents, accumulating $1 in costs. Then the business sells the something for $1.10, drawing a 10-cent profit. Under the Cruz plan, Rosenberg said, the business pays the flat tax solely on the 60-cent difference between the $1.10 in sales and the 50 cents spent on the wholesale purchase. And, Rosenberg noted, theres another way to pin what Cruzs plan subjects to the 16 percent tax -- by isolating what the business makes, the 10 cents, and then adding the 50 cents in employee payroll. Its very fair to interpret what Sen. Rubio said as correct, Rosenberg said, though its also worth mention (again) that Cruzs plan eliminates existing payroll and income taxes. Broadly, Rosenberg didnt agree that Cruzs plan whipsaws businesses, saying: Its a change in the way theyre taxed. Its not taxing something twice. We didnt hear back from Rubios camp about his claim nor did Cruz aides engage. Footnote: A Jan. 14, 2016,foundation postby economist Alan Cole says Cruz and Rubio arent proposing entirely distinct tax approaches. In fact, Cole wrote, if you put together two taxes from Rubios plan (and fiddle with the rates), you can actually synthetically construct the business flat tax from Cruzs plan! Our ruling Rubio said that under Cruzs tax plan, businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. Under Cruzs plan, that rate applies both to net income and payroll expenditures though the way this description was phrased by Rubio merits clarification. That is, the 16 percent would not be applied to what a business makes and separately applied again to money paid to employees. Also unsaid: The proposed tax would replace taxes including payroll and income taxes. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2178 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: After Donald Trump had himself a fine time ripping the sleazy media, Hillary Clinton did a Trump-like thing: she called into two cable news shows.
She was asked about Trump….but didn’t make much news. And therein lies the heart of the problem for a news business that is supposed to be dedicated to fairness.
One candidate is openly hostile to the press but does all kinds of interviews—television, radio, newspapers, magazines, websites—day after day. The other candidate is privately hostile to the press but also very selective in doing interviews—and hasn’t held a news conference in months.
Of course there’s an imbalance in the coverage, and it’s about more than ratings—though attracting more eyeballs and clicks is clearly a factor.
The New York Times, in a piece on this very subject, offered an example:
“Last week, none of the three major cable news networks — CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC — carried Mrs. Clinton’s speech to a workers’ union in Las Vegas, where she debuted sharp new attack lines against Mr. Trump.
“Instead, each chose to broadcast a live feed of an empty podium in North Dakota, on a stage where Mr. Trump was about to speak.â€
So “AWAITING TRUMP PRESSER†is deemed more newsworthy than the presumptive Democratic nominee actually speaking. And that does not speak well of the media.
Clinton tried copying a Trump tactic by calling into shows on CNN and MSNBC that afternoon. “It took a reporter to shame him into actually making his contribution and getting the money to veterans,†she told Jake Tapper.
But that meant she was in reactive mode, rather than generating headlines on her own.
Clinton’s spokesman, Brian Fallon, told the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent that “the judge of whether we’re able to build a positive narrative around her is not whether we are getting 10 hours to his eight during cable day programming. We can do that on a state-specific level, where local coverage departs from what may be the feel of the campaign if you’re only watching cable networks. Also, we can build a positive narrative about her based on her standing up and condemning the very things that he is saying and doing that are commanding all that media attention…There’s a conventional wisdom settling in that visibility on daytime cable equates with him having political strength.â€
Well, maybe. But so far Trump is sucking up most of the oxygen, even while ripping those who provide it as sleazebags.
There is another thread here that goes beyond Trump having endless at-bats while Clinton mainly sends in surrogates from the dugout. The Donald, when he engages in verbal fisticuffs, seems to be enjoying himself, while Hillary seems like she’s enduring an unpleasant ritual.
In New York magazine, liberal writer Rebecca Traister sees “a pervasive defensiveness that gets in the way of her projecting authenticity, an intense desire for privacy that keeps voters from feeling as if they know her — especially problematic in an era in which social media makes personal connection with voters more important than ever. Clinton’s wariness about letting the world in is in part her personality and in part born of experience. A lifetime spent in the searing spotlight has taught her that exposure too often equals evisceration…
“If Clinton suffers from a kind of political PTSD that makes her overly cautious and scripted and closed-off, then its primary trigger is the press corps that trails her everywhere she goes. Clinton hates the press. A band of young reporters follows her, thanklessly, from event to event, and she gives them almost nothing. Unlike other candidates, she does not ride on the same plane with them (though this may change once the general election starts and the traveling group gets bigger). Every once in a while she has an off-the-record drink with them, but without the frequency or fluidity of her husband, whose off-the-record conversations with the press were legendarily candid.â€
Clinton hates the press. So says a sympathetic writer. So, of course, does Trump, which may speak volumes about my profession but also about this era of hyperpartisanship.
And yet voters tend to prefer candidates who come off as happy warriors. On that score, Trump’s overt hostility is playing better—and is more entertaining—than Hillary’s covert hostility.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2179 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: DC lawyer Victoria Toensing is one smart cookie. She s representing a former FBI informant who has evidence on kickbacks and bribery involving the transportation of uranium in the US. She recently told Sean Hannity her client will brief Congress about Russian involvement in the U.S. uranium market. This includes widespread bribery and actions that involved the Clintons I m not going into detail, attorney Victoria Toensing said on the Oct. 24 Hannity. You know that, Sean. But the informant will give an overview and specific conversations that he had with Russians in what they were thinking about the money that they were spending. I mean, let me just be that general and it involves the Clintons. The director of the FBI at that time was Robert Mueller, and he is now the special counsel investigating alleged Russian collusion with the 2016 Trump campaign. The undercover investigation involving Toensing s client occurred between 2009 and 2014, and the senior attorney on the case was Rod Rosenstein, who is now the deputy attorney general of the United States and the official who appointed Mueller as special counsel.Further, all this information indicates that many senior Obama administration officials knew about instances of bribery and money laundering involving at least one Russian official, at a time when Russia wanted to expand its uranium market in the United States, and when the administration through a special committee had to approve or deny the sale of a company, Vancouver-based Uranium One, to Rosatom. (Rosatom is the Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation.)Some of the people on that Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States included then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napalitano, and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.The committee approved the sale of Uranium One to Rosatom in October 2010. That sale gave Russia, and President Vladimir Putin, control over 20% of U.S. uranium production. (At least nine investors in Uranium One prior to, during, and after that sale donated $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.) So, Mueller, [Rod] Rosenstein, maybe even [James] Comey at the time, and the president of the United States certainly Eric Holder was the head of the DOJ they all knew that they had all this evidence that the Russians had infiltrated with the purpose of a criminal enterprise to corner the market on uranium, the foundational material of nuclear weapons? asked Hannity.Toensing said, That is correct. Via: cns news | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2180 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: In the tech business, you often invent the product first and find out what it’s for later. Facebook was a college social site before it became a global media hub Amazon was a bookseller before it was, well, everything. Likewise with AMC’s “Halt and Catch Fire,†set in the 1980s at the advent of the revolution. When the series began two years ago, it was another chasing a trend — in this case, the antihero. Joe MacMillan (Lee Pace) a mysterious, drifter of a businessman, was paired with Gordon Clark (Scoot McNairy) a brilliant but failed engineer, in a sketchy scheme to bring an IBM clone to market. As a plot, it was less than inspiring, and as a character story, less than inspired: an Don Draper and a Walter White who dealt in megabytes rather than meth. But at the end of its first season, “Halt†did something almost in television, if not in tech: It upended its entire project. With the introduction of the Apple Macintosh, Joe and Gordon discovered that they had been chasing yesterday’s dream. They were thinking too small, too incrementally. The quest of the entire season had been a failure of imagination. And “Halt†would have been as well, had it not rebooted itself. The outstanding second season latched on to a much more powerful idea. The 1980s, it said, were not the decade of a mechanical revolution but a cultural one. The headlines then were about computing power coming to your desktop. But the change, barely glimmering in the days of telephone modems, lay in the connection of every desktop to every other. It was the birth of the social internet, where we now live. Season 2 followed Mutiny, a nascent online gaming company started by Gordon’s wife, Donna (Kerry Bishé) and Cameron Howe (Mackenzie Davis) an impassioned sparkplug of a programmer. For all practical purposes, the series changed not just its focus but its lead characters. Cameron was visionary but impractical Donna relished the new start but chafed at being forced into the role of the buzz kill adult in the room. (Ms. Bishé gave a nuanced, undersung performance.) This was something we hadn’t seen so often before: a tricky but fruitful alliance between two women in a industry. Cameron had the digital native’s instinct to see the online world as a place of constant invention. Donna had the emotional intelligence to notice that Mutiny’s social component — its chat rooms — was the future of the future. Season 3, which begins on Tuesday, continues the show’s process, picking up in 1986, as Mutiny has relocated from Texas to Silicon Valley and is beginning to reconceive itself one more time. (Cameron and Donna have noticed their gamers’ taking over Mutiny chat to negotiate trades — shades of Craigslist or eBay.) The growing pains continue, throwing the women into the unfamiliar and world of venture capitalists. “It only takes one of them to ask you to the dance,†says their consigliere, John Bosworth (Toby Huss). Cameron replies, “I love how even the metaphors in this business are sexist. †They find a possible ally in Diane (Annabeth Gish) a sympathetic but bluntly honest investor. Gordon has come along in tow, feeling at loose ends in a managerial role at Mutiny. The chameleonic Joe, meanwhile, has landed in California as the head of a firm, sporting a Steve Jobsian beard and speaking in pretentious koans. (“I’ve been accused of selling fear,†he tells a rapt audience. “But let me ask you: Is it fear or is it truth? â€) Joe’s as a smug tech guru suits Mr. Pace, a striking but peculiar presence whom the show has struggled to use effectively. (He was well cast in the “Hobbit†movies as the frosty, elven king Thranduil.) He seems fully at home now, strutting around his office listening to Gary Numan music, carrying himself like a human Patrick Nagel print. Joe 3. 0 is also a prelude to the fatuous moguls of HBO’s “Silicon Valley,†to which “Halt†is a temporal and tonal bookend. Where “Silicon Valley†is a gleeful satire about business people feigning idealism — all that about changing the world — “Halt†is an empathetic drama about idealists trying to fake their way into business. The new season begins to give you some sense of how we got from there to here. We see the same scrambles to get advantage, the pilgrimages up and down Sand Hill Road seeking venture capital. But where “Silicon Valley†trades in decacorns ( valued at over $10 billion) it’s jarring in “Halt†to see deals done for six figures — not even Dr. Evil money. The new season takes time to reset, and the movement in the early episodes is slow. The character dynamics are solid, though, and the ’80s details continue to be spot on. (At a fancy Valley restaurant, Donna stumbles over the pronunciation of a trendy new dish: risotto.) But any period piece can recreate bygone days. “Halt†lets you see them as the cusp of bracing change. The real product in its tech business isn’t hardware or software — it’s tomorrow, and “Halt and Catch Fire†makes its past future feel dewy and new. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2181 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Saudi Arabian women rejoiced at their new freedom to drive on Wednesday, with some taking to the roads even though licenses will not be issued for nine months. Hundreds of others chatted with hiring managers at a Riyadh job fair, factoring in the new element in their career plans: their ability to drive themselves to work. Saudi Arabia will never be the same again. The rain begins with a single drop, Manal al-Sharif, who was arrested in 2011 after a driving protest, said in an online statement. King Salman announced the historic change on Tuesday, ending a conservative tradition which limited women s mobility and was seen by rights activists as an emblem of their suppression. Saudi Arabia was the only remaining country in the world to bar women from driving. At the jobs fair, Sultana, 30, said she had received four job offers since graduating from law school two years ago but turned them down because of transport issues. My parents don t allow me to use Uber or Careem, so one of my brothers or the driver would need to take me, she said, referring to dial-a ride companies. I m so excited to learn how to drive. This will be a big difference for me. I will be independent. I won t need a driver. I can do everything myself. She plans to start taking driving lessons when her family travels abroad for vacation. Other women weren t waiting. Internet videos showed a handful of women driving cars overnight, even though the ban has not been officially lifted. The move represents a big crack in the laws and social mores governing women in the conservative Muslim kingdom. The guardianship system requires women to have a male relative s approval for most decisions on education, employment, marriage, travel plans and even medical treatment. The new initiative recalls previous modernizing milestones that unnerved conservatives at first but were eventually accepted, such as the 1960s start of state education for girls and the introduction of television. The decree is expected to boost the fortunes of 32-year-old Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has ascended to the heights of power in the kingdom with an ambitious domestic reform program and assertive foreign policy. A muted response from Saudi s clergy, which has long backed the ban, suggested power shared between the Al Saud dynasty and the Wahhabi religious establishment could be shifting decisively in favor of the royals. Many younger Saudis regard Prince Mohammed s ascent as evidence their generation is taking a central place in running a country whose patriarchal traditions have for decades made power the province of the old and blocked women s progress. Sharif, the activist, described the driving ban s removal as just the start to end long-standing unjust laws (that) have always considered Saudi women minors who are not trusted to drive their own destiny. A driving instructor at a government-run center said women called all day to inquire about registering a license, but he had received no instructions yet from the government. Um Faisal, a mother of six, said her daughters would get licenses as soon as possible. Years ago, there wasn t work outside the house. But today women need to get out and go places. This generation needs to drive, she said, clad in a long black abaya. The Saudi ambassador to Washington said on Tuesday women would not need their guardians permission to get a license, nor to have a guardian in the car when driving. In a country where gender segregation has been strictly enforced for decades in keeping with the austere Wahhabi form of Sunni Islam, the decree means women will have regular contact with unrelated men, such as fellow drivers and traffic police. Other rules have loosened recently, with the government sponsoring concerts deemed un-Islamic by clerics, allowing women into a large sports stadium for the first time and permitting them to dance beside men in a central Riyadh street over the weekend. Amnesty International welcomed the decree as long overdue but said there was still a range of discriminatory laws and practices that needed to be overturned. That risks inflaming tensions with influential Wahhabi clerics with whom the ruling Al Saud has enjoyed a close strategic alliance since the kingdom s founding. The state-backed Council of Religious Scholars expressed support for the king s decree. Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Sheikh, who has repeatedly opposed women working and driving and said letting them into politics may mean opening the door to evil , has yet to comment. Some Islamist clerics are currently in detention in Saudi Arabia following an apparent crackdown on potential opponents of the kingdom s rulers this month. Bernard Haykel, professor of Near East studies at Princeton University, said the driving announcement may help explain that. They might have raised a storm against the government by mobilizing opposition in the name of religion. They have been stymied, he said. Still, some men expressed outrage at the about-face by prominent clerics, who in the past have sometimes justified the driving ban by saying women s brains are too small or that driving endangered their ovaries. Whoever says this is permitted is a sinner. Women driving means great evils and this makes them especially sinful, one Twitter user wrote. Kawthar al-Arbash, a member of the Shura Council, a government advisory body, acknowledged that resistance, saying: That s how things go. Everything new is accompanied by fears. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2182 | 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, when this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar - I call it mismanagement deficit.
contextual information: Its the number that keeps on giving.Assembly Minority Leader Jon Bramnick is the latest public official to get mileage from a claim about an $11 billion albatross that was hanging around Chris Christies neck when he became governor in 2010.Bramnick, a Republican representing parts of Union, Somerset and Morris counties, mentioned the number during a roundtable discussion Feb. 8 for NJTVs On The Record with Michael Aron. PolitiFact New Jersey has checked the existence of such a deficit on several occasions when Christie made similar claims.Why did Bramnick bring up the number?Bramnick and several other legislators were discussing the concept of the state returning money to municipalities that utilities pay towns for hosting utility poles, facilities and more. That money is paid to the state, which is supposed to then send the money estimated in the hundreds of millions -- to the municipalities. That hasnt happened, however, as the state grapples with various economic issues. Bramnick said the theory of returning the money is an idea no one would disagree with, but he questioned where the millions would come from.When this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar -- I call it mismanagement deficit, Bramnick said, adding that Christie has been working to improve the states finances.Bramnicks right that Christie took office with an $11 billion deficit, but that number is a theoretical figure only.Lets explain the deficit.The $11 billion refers to a $10.7 billion structural deficit the states nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services projected for the fiscal 2011 budget year. That budget was put together under then-Gov. Jon Corzine. Christies first budget was for fiscal year 2012.A structural deficit measures how much money the state would need if current services and revenues remained the same and all statutory spending obligations were fully funded.The state, however, does not have to meet all of its obligations since the budget supersedes statute.That means that while a state statute may require certain levels of spending on different programs, the governor can sign a budget that does otherwise.And like his predecessor, thats basically what Christie did when it was his turn to craft a spending plan. In Christies case, he skipped a $3 billion pension payment and didnt fully fund the school-aid formula or the states property tax rebate program.The result? New Jersey still had a projected structural deficit for the fiscal 2012 budget year, but slightly smaller. It was $10.5 billion, according to the OLS.So there was an approximate $11 billion deficit when Christie took office, but in theory only.Bramnick acknowledged that the deficit in place when Christie took office was a structural deficit, and said he cited it during the discussion to illustrate the states financial woes.Our rulingBramnick said during a roundtable discussion on NJTVs On The Record with Michael Aron that when this governor came to office, he had (an) 11 billion dollar -- I call it mismanagement -- deficit.The OLS projected a nearly $11 billion structural deficit for the fiscal year 2011 budget created under Corzine, but its the type of deficit that measures how much money the state would need to maintain funding for services, if all required spending was fully funded and revenues stayed the same.Bramnicks right that a deficit existed when Christie came into office, but it was a theoretical one that resulted because administrations prior to Christies didnt spend all of the money needed to fully fund required expenses -- a move Christie repeated for his first budget as governor. We rate Bramnick's claim Mostly True. To comment on this story, go toNJ.com. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2183 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: In the beginning, there was the book. Famously long, and a bit of a slog. But Volume 2 Part 5 caught the cruise ship pianist’s eye. There was that beautiful girl, killing time in the big city while her fiancé was away the flirtation with a dreamy playboy the unhappily married rich man starting to fall apart the swirl of aristocrats, Russia at war, and a comet streaking across the sky. This section of “War and Peace,†Dave Malloy thought, would make a perfect musical. That was in 2007, on an ocean liner traveling from New York to Bermuda Mr. Malloy, a struggling musician, was earning his keep in the house band and passing the time talking Tolstoy, via email and phone calls, with his onshore girlfriend. Now, nine years later, the musical birthed from that passage, “Natasha, Pierre the Great Comet of 1812,†is about to open on Broadway. It is one of the most anticipated shows of the season, and one of the most unusual, pairing a group of experimental downtown theatermakers with Josh Groban, a pop singer from the mellifluous mainstream. They’re all making their Broadway debuts, as are most of the actors — in all, 24 members of the cast and creative team. The show, like most Broadway ventures, is an expensive gamble: in this case, a $14 million bet that what was once a wild night of storytelling (in its first incarnation, the show provided free vodka at every table) can retain its sense of intimacy and authenticity in a vastly expanded space while broadening its appeal beyond adventurous theatergoers to the tourists who sustain commercially successful musicals. The core creative team — the composer, Mr. Malloy the director, Rachel Chavkin and the set designer, Mimi Lien — is optimistic. As daunting as selling an adaptation of “War and Peace†to a mass audience may seem, Mr. Malloy notes that the tenant of the Imperial Theater, where “The Great Comet†begins previews Oct. 18 and opens Nov. 14, was also an adaptation of a sweeping historical novel — Victor Hugo’s “Les Misérables†— and these days no one questions that tome’s marketability as a musical. “‘War and Peace’ wouldn’t have lasted 200 years if he hadn’t really tapped into something universal,†Mr. Malloy said, speaking during an interview in his Brooklyn studio, with a portrait of Tolstoy on the wall, Christmas lights still strung over a piano, a bookcase groaning with volumes of Marvel comics, and a bottle of whiskey atop a . Mr. Malloy has little interest in writing the dramas that dominate contemporary theater, and instead said he finds himself drawn to classical literature for subject matter. He first drew attention with a “songplay†celebration of “Beowulf,†is now working on a musicalization of Ҡand has even tried adapting the Zhuangzi, a foundational Taoist text. He jokes (or dreams?) about an “impossible novels trilogyâ€: “War and Peace,†“ †and “Ulysses. †“There’s a perverse interest in picking the texts that have a reputation as being boring,†he said. “Well, no: ‘War and Peace’ is an amazing book, and here’s all the reasons why. It’s a trashy romance novel. It’s not this unapproachable academic piece. †The Broadway production is the fourth for “The Great Comet. †The musical, then billed as an “electropop opera,†was commissioned by, workshopped, and first staged, in 2012, at a Off Broadway nonprofit, Ars Nova, with 87 seats, rented costumes for the actors and Costco pierogies for the audience. “By the end of the first workshop, I remember thinking, I have no idea what’s going on, but this is going to be incredible,†recalled Jason Eagan, the company’s founding artistic director. (The show was the biggest ever undertaken by Ars Nova, and will be its first ever to transfer to Broadway.) Mr. Malloy had a strong sense of what he wanted the show to feel like, shaped by two experiences: a boozy night at Chez Poulet, a San Francisco warehouse space where “Beowulf†was performed with actors staging their fighting among the drinkers and another at Cafe Margarita, a Moscow bar with an unmarked door where musicians were with diners, so crowded that Mr. Malloy had a viola at his ear. As collaborators for “The Great Comet,†he enlisted two friends who shared his passion for erasing lines between performers and audiences: Ms. Chavkin, a founder of an experimental theater company called the Team, and Ms. Lien, a college architecture major who had studied painting in Italy before finding her way to set design. “The goal from the beginning has been remarkably the same: putting the performers in close proximity to the audience members, and putting the audience members in very close proximity to each other, sitting at a table together, drinking vodka and eating bread,†said Ms. Lien, who last year won a MacArthur Foundation “genius grant†in part for her work on this show. “It’s not so much a show that you sit back and watch from a distance, but it’s an experience that you’re actually inside of,†she added. The Ars Nova staging, which ran for just 39 performances, was a sensation, as much for the environmental production as the energetic storytelling: In an effort to disorient patrons, Ms. Lien routed ticketholders downstairs and past dressing rooms into a makeshift nightclub where actors and musicians performed atop bars and between banquettes while patrons ate black bread and rattled shakers. Mr. Malloy not only conducted the band but also played the piano and the accordion and starred as Pierre Natasha was portrayed by a recent (and radiant) Juilliard graduate named Phillipa Soo, who was later seen in the role by Miranda and cast as Eliza in “Hamilton. †Howard Kagan, a board member at Ars Nova, was taken with the show — at first, he thought of it as mostly an unusual experience, akin to “Sleep No More,†but then he began to focus on the songs, and decided, with his wife and Janet Kagan, to test its promise. The first commercial production, beginning in 2013, was in a tent, named “Kazino,†erected on an empty lot in Manhattan’s meatpacking district, with full dinner service (for big spenders, a seafood tower with caviar was available) and then in Midtown (this time as a supperless supper club) on a lot, as luck would have it, next to the Imperial. Late last year, “Great Comet†opened at the American Repertory Theater in Cambridge, Mass. — the first time in a house, as a chance to test how the enveloping design and peripatetic players might work in a conventional auditorium. Each production featured vodka (on Broadway, to be sold by vendors walking through the aisles) and free pierogies (on Broadway, served flaky and in boxes, after the variety tested in Cambridge proved too messy). But with each move, the show has changed: songs rewritten and replaced, an ensemble and then roving musicians hired, a dance break inserted. A handful of defining visual elements have remained: a bleak, unexpected entrance passage (meant to evoke images of a Cold bunker) a performance space cocooned entirely in red velvet drapery (opulence) walls covered with Russian paintings hung (aristocracy) multiple chandeliers (the opera) including one giant “Sputnik†chandelier (a comet). The Imperial is being rejiggered to preserve the immersive feel: a couple hundred people will be seated on the stage new internal staircases will permit performers to move between orchestra and mezzanine there will be side tables with lamps and egg shakers interspersed among the seats, along with snaking platforms to allow for elevated action by actors. Among those who came to check out the tent production was Mr. Groban, who has sold more than 35 million albums and DVDs and has long wanted to perform theater. He tweeted his enthusiasm for the material later, the Kagans, looking for a star who could help them justify a Broadway transfer, reached out to him, just as he was also urging his agent to look for stage roles. After an introductory phone call (at 4 a. m. for Mr. Malloy, who was then in Berlin) Mr. Groban, Mr. Malloy and Ms. Chavkin met at the Weather Up bar in TriBeCa as they all began imagining what it might be like for the famed singer to take direction from emerging artists. “I didn’t at all want to push myself into this project, but I wanted to make my interest known,†Mr. Groban said. “It had to be something they felt would be right. †Mr. Malloy wound up visiting the singer’s apartment, so the two could see what it felt like to sing through, and talk about, the score. “I didn’t want to work with a diva,†Mr. Malloy said. “It turned out he’s supercollaborative. †Over the last few weeks, as Mr. Groban wrapped up a tour and began preparing for rehearsals, Mr. Malloy has been looking for places to trim the score, while Ms. Lien has overseen construction of the set at Hudson Scenic Studio in Yonkers. Ms. Chavkin has been holed up with her choreography team at the New 42nd Street Studios, moving pennies around theater blueprints to try to plot entrances and exits and quick costume changes. Broadway beckons — the production bigger and grander, but, they hope, at heart unchanged. “The whole beauty of the show is to make you feel like stuff’s happening everywhere, and that everyone’s having a different experience but no one is missing a central action,†Ms. Chavkin said. “We want to make sure everyone is feeling the life of the show. †With each step toward Broadway, “Natasha, Pierre and the Great Comet of 1812†has grown. Ars Nova, 2012 SEATS 87 PERFORMANCES 39 PERFORMERS 16 CHANDELIERS 10 PAINTINGS 59 Kazino, SEATS 199 PERFORMANCES 303 PERFORMERS 25 CHANDELIERS 11 PAINTINGS 147 American Repertory Theater, SEATS 503 PERFORMANCES 33 PERFORMERS 34 CHANDELIERS 21 PAINTINGS 273 Imperial Theater, 2016 SEATS 1, 200 BEGINS Oct. 18 PERFORMERS 43 CHANDELIERS 31 PAINTINGS 414 | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2184 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Pete Souza/WhiteHouse.gov Will the Establishment elite allow Trump to take the presidency on Jan. 20, 2017?
WASHINGTON D.C. ( INTELLIHUB ) — The Establishment elite are in panic mode after their rigged elections backfired in their face when vast seas of patriotic Americans took to the polls in favor of Donald J. Trump, giving America’s new President-elect the electoral votes needed to win.
Last Thursday, during a meeting held at the White House, between Donald Trump and President Barack Obama, you could just see how irked Obama was knowing that he was sitting beside a truly patriotic soul; a man with a raging fire burning inside him; a man with the spirit to facilitate making America great again. Not to mention Trump was the man that brought Obama’s birth certificate issue to the forefront. The look on @POTUS face when he met @realDonaldTrump #priceless
— Shepard Ambellas (@ShepardAmbellas) November 12, 2016
In fact, during the meeting Obama was so threatened by Trump’s presence that his 8-year-long legacy likely flashed before his very eyes as the President of the United States realized that on day number one of Donald Trump’s presidency, a president Trump, at that point, could simply nullify any and all executive orders signed by the then would-be former president Barack Obama during his tenure as POTUS . What will happen if Trump nullifies all of Obama’s executive orders once POTUS? Ted Eytan/Flickr Does this mean no more ‘transgender bathrooms?’
Absolutely. Imagine that; a normal world, how it always was for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Naval History & Heritage Command/Flickr Does that mean Americans can keep their guns?
Sure does. America would not be America if we did not have the right to bear arms and work to undo what anti-gunners have done in Washington D.C. over the past two decades and what Obama has done over the past 8-years against the U.S. Constitution . Fibonacci Blue/Flickr Does that mean the repeal of Obamacare or major failed portions of it?
Yes it does. Does that mean the preservation of our civil rights and liberties per the Constitution?
Sure does. Does that mean implementing a sensible immigration policy; possibly building a wall?
Yes it does. After all, the Russians are now using advanced killer robots at their border, ones that can engage and kill humans from over 6 miles away. Nancy <I’m gonna SNAP!/Flickr Does that mean putting an end to dangerous geoengineering programs that our affecting all living things on the planet and our weather?
One can only hope.
But you can see where I am going with this. The Establishment elite simply do not want to lose their power and in my opinion will likely do anything to keep it. Remember, they have built a legacy and plan to protect it at all costs.
So in other words; will Donald Trump actually take office against all odds?
Please comment below and share your opinion on this highly important issue.
Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, filmmaker , radio talk show host and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics. Established in 2013, Intellihub.com is ranked in the upper 1% traffic tier on the World Wide Web. Read more from Shep’s World . Get the Podcast . Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter . ©2016. INTELLLIHUB.COM. All Rights Reserved. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2185 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A Republican bill to dismantle Obamacare has been pulled by U.S. House Republican leadership and will not be voted on as planned on Friday afternoon, a House Republican leadership aide said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2186 | 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: Starving Child and Vulture Claim summaries: "Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food no matter how bad it can taste."
contextual information: If a hundred of the most talented members of the advertising industry were tasked with creating an image to illustrate the concepts of poverty and famine, quite possibly none of them would come up with anything nearly as grippingly and devastatingly effective as a 1993 picture snapped by South African freelance photographer Kevin Carter: The PHOTO in the mail is the "Pulitzer prize" winning photo taken in 1994 during the Sudan famine. The picture depicts a famine stricken child crawling towards an United Nations food camp, located a kilometer away. The vulture is waiting for the child to die so that it can eat it. This picture shocked the whole world. No one knows what happened to the child, including the photographer Kevin Carter who left the place as soon as the photograph was taken. Three months later he committed suicide due to depression. This was found in his diary, "Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food no matter how bad it can taste and how full I may be I pray that He will protect this little boy, guide and deliver him away from his misery. I pray that we will be more sensitive towards the world around us and not be blinded be our own selfish nature and interests." I hope this picture will always serve as a reminder to us that how fortunate we are and that we must never ever take things for granted. His poignant photograph of an emaciated toddler who collapsed from hunger on her way to a feeding center in famine-ravaged Sudan while a vulture ominously loomed in the background was originally published in the New York Times (which later described it as "a metaphor for Africa's despair") and earned Carter the 1994 Pulitzer Prize in the Feature Photography category, and the image has since become widely known as a metaphor for Africa's despair. Pulitzer Prize As described in Time magazine, the scene Carter captured in his now-famous photograph was one he stumbled across during a trip he made on his own in order to cover the civil strife in war-torn Sudan: In 1993 Carter headed north of the border with [friend and fellow journalist] Joo Silva to photograph the rebel movement in famine-stricken Sudan. To make the trip, Carter had taken a leave from the [South Africa] Weekly Mail and borrowed money for the air fare. Immediately after their plane touched down in the village of Ayod, Carter began snapping photos of famine victims. Seeking relief from the sight of masses of people starving to death, he wandered into the open bush. He heard a soft, high-pitched whimpering and saw a tiny girl trying to make her way to the feeding center. As he crouched to photograph her, a vulture landed in view. Careful not to disturb the bird, he positioned himself for the best possible image. He would later say he waited about 20 minutes, hoping the vulture would spread its wings. It did not, and after he took his photographs, he chased the bird away and watched as the little girl resumed her struggle. Afterward he sat under a tree, lit a cigarette, talked to God and cried. "He was depressed afterward," Silva recalls. "He kept saying he wanted to hug his daughter." After another day in Sudan, Carter returned to Johannesburg. Coincidentally, the New York Times, which was looking for pictures of Sudan, bought his photograph and ran it on March 26, 1993. The picture immediately became an icon of Africa's anguish. Hundreds of people wrote and called the Times asking what had happened to the child (the paper reported that it was not known whether she reached the feeding center); and papers around the world reproduced the photo. Friends and colleagues complimented Carter on his feat. His self-confidence climbed. But Kevin Carter was also a troubled soul, struggling with issues such as financial insecurity, drug problems, failed relationships, and the horrors of having witnessed multiple scenes of death enough of a burden for anyone to struggle with, but in Carter's case a burden made extra-heavy by the critical condemnation heaped upon him for taking the photograph that had made him world-famous: Though the photo helped draw enormous attention to the humanitarian crisis that was engulfing Sudan, it was criticized by others who felt that Carter should have helped the girl and was instead exploiting her suffering for his gain. The real vulture, they said in vitriolic hate mail, was Carter himself. Some photojournalists might have easily dismissed such criticism, but it hit Carter hard and fed his self-doubts. On 27 July 1994, barely two months after having received his Pulitzer Prize, 33-year-old Kevin Carter could shoulder that burden no more and took his own life: The Braamfonteinspruit is a small river that cuts southward through Johannesburg's northern suburbs and through Parkmore, where the Carters once lived. At around 9 p.m., Kevin Carter backed his red Nissan pickup truck against a blue gum tree at the Field and Study Center. He had played there often as a little boy. The Sandton Bird Club was having its monthly meeting there, but nobody saw Carter as he used silver gaffer tape to attach a garden hose to the exhaust pipe and run it to the passenger-side window. Wearing unwashed Lee jeans and an Esquire T-shirt, he got in and switched on the engine. Then he put music on his Walkman and lay over on his side, using the knapsack as a pillow. The suicide note he left behind is a litany of nightmares and dark visions, a clutching attempt at autobiography, self-analysis, explanation, excuse. After coming home from New York, he wrote, he was "depressed ... without phone ... money for rent ... money for child support ... money for debts ... money!!! ... I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings & corpses & anger & pain ... of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners ... " Although the purported diary entry (beginning "Dear God, I promise I will never waste my food") that has been tacked onto this photograph may sound like something Kevin Carter might have written, those words were not recorded in his diary, nor are they known to have been written or spoken by him. They were added to the photograph by an unknown hand after the picture had been circulating on the Internet for several years. Kevin Carter's life (and death) was the subject of the 2004 documentary, The Life of Kevin Carter. The Life of Kevin Carter Keller, Bill. "Kevin Carter, a Pulitzer Winner for Sudan Photo, Is Dead at 33."
The New York Times. 29 July 1994 (p. B8).
MacLeod, Scott. "The Life and Death of Kevin Carter."
Time. 12 September 1994.
McMurtrie, John. "A Photographer's Burden of Seeing the World's Despair."
San Francisco Chronicle. 2 May 2005. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2187 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: This skyrocketing price increase is a direct result from several insurers either scaling back their participation or withdrawing completely. Those private insurance corporations who stay are now enjoying a near monopolistic control. And monopolies always jack up prices. It happened with the railroads over a century ago, it's been occurring with the airlines and telecoms, and now health insurance.
For years it's been believed that Dubya was the worst president in the modern era; the implication being that Obama, even with all his faults, is somehow better. I think after 8 long years of his awful reign that we can safely say that he's just as bad as Dubya, worse in some cases (bombed more countries than Dubya, far bigger assault on civil liberties, etc). Expect things to get worse, far worse, for the mass of people when Hillary gets elected. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2188 | 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 Olive Oil 'Fix' Sagging Breasts? Claim summaries: No credible evidences suggests olive oil or any other topical treatment can prevent or reverse loss of firmness in breasts.
contextual information: On 12 February 2017, the Facebook page "GreenYatra" published an image that claimed olive oil can be used to prevent or reverse "sagging breasts." The image-based claim did not link to any articles or other corroborating information, stating only: "Massaging your breasts with olive oil is an excellent technique to firm sagging breasts. Olive oil is a rich source of antioxidants and fatty acids that can reverse the damage caused by free radicals and prevent sagging breasts. Plus, it will help improve the skin tone and texture." According to the claim, the topical application of olive oil either circumvents or reverses the loss of elasticity in breasts. No specific reason was provided for the assertion that olive oil, as opposed to any other type of oil, could replicate the effect shown. The efficacy of topical treatments for sagging breasts or loss of skin elasticity is often discussed in cosmetic circles, partly due to the cost and invasiveness of surgical approaches. However, research demonstrating that any single topical ingredient can prevent (much less reverse) loss of skin elasticity is notably limited. Antioxidant ointments, creams, and lotions may help reduce the risk of wrinkles and protect against sun damage. Unlike sunscreens, they build up in the skin and are not washed away, so the protection may last longer. Selenium, coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), and alpha-lipoic acid are antioxidants that can be applied to the skin, but evidence of their benefits is limited, and more studies in humans are needed. More commonly used antioxidants are described below. Your dermatologist can tell you which product is right for you. Research from 2012 indicates that antioxidants could potentially prevent damage to facial skin, but the evidence was "limited," and reversal was not referenced. Only 1.5 percent of olive oil contains antioxidants (and that fraction is not composed entirely of antioxidants). Other foods are described as being higher in antioxidants, but no memes recommended rubbing a berry paste onto breasts for firmness. Research overwhelmingly examined the efficacy of topical treatments for facial skin, which lacks the weight and density of breast tissue. Although topicals designed for facial skin need only penetrate a few dermal layers, any product designed or intended for use on breasts would have to enter the breast tissue to "lift" or prevent elasticity loss, which is a far more challenging task. A blog post written by Miami-based cosmetic surgeon Dr. Ary Krau directly addresses the question of whether any specific topical substance (including olive oil) has ever shown promise in improving loss of elasticity for breast tissue in clinical research. Unfortunately, no cream or lotion has been clinically proven or FDA-approved to lift the breasts into a higher position. Don't waste your money on any product that claims to improve your breast position. While genetics play a significant role in breast sagging, there are a few things you can do to prevent it in the first place. Try not to fluctuate greatly in body weight; gaining and losing a lot of weight in a short period can take its toll on the breasts. Be diligent about wearing sunscreen on your chest and décolletage area to protect the skin from the sun's rays. Wear a supportive bra as much as possible, especially when performing high-intensity aerobic exercise. We contacted Dr. Krau's office, and a representative for the clinic told us that no effective topical treatment appears to exist. A thorough search of related studies turned up no strong evidence that facial skin or breast tissue could be firmed by topical treatments at all. A 5 percent concentration of Vitamin C (not olive oil) showed moderate success in the treatment of photo-aging in a small 2003 study, but those findings were not relevant to breast tissue or olive oil. There is research conducted by individuals who contracted with cosmetic medical firms that indicates some success in the ongoing development of a topical version of botulinum toxin type A (popularly known by the brand name Botox) intended solely for the face. However, that research only concerns a clinically prescribed substance (botulinum toxin, not a pantry product) and included no indications that it could be used on breast tissue. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2189 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: It was roughly 15 years ago that a high school student from Virginia named Ryan Speedo Green first visited the Metropolitan Opera on a school trip. At the time, he was working to put his life back on track after a rough childhood that included a harrowing two months in juvenile detention. But he set himself an unlikely goal. “I am going to sing at the Met,†he told one of his teachers. And he did. The story of his leap from solitary confinement to opera’s grandest stage is the subject of a book released this month, “Sing for Your Life: A Story of Race, Music, and Family,†by Daniel Bergner. And on Wednesday night, Mr. Green, now a with a burgeoning international career, was back at the Met, basking in bravos and tossed flowers after singing his biggest role there yet: Colline, the poor philosopher in Puccini’s “La Bohème. †In his review in The New York Times, James R. Oestreich called Mr. Green “the real showstopper†and described his big moment — a ode to a beloved overcoat he plans to pawn to help his friends — as “immensely touching. †Backstage after the curtain calls, Mr. Green greeted some of the people who had helped him get there. There was Betty Hughes, who had taught him in an elementary school class made up of the most troubled children in his district, and who had not given up on him when he hurled his desk in anger on the first day. There was her husband, Leon, who ran the arts high school in Norfolk, Va. where Mr. Green studied singing. And there was Denyce Graves, the who sang the title role in the Met performance of “Carmen†that he had heard on that high school trip — his introduction to opera. “You changed my entire life,†Mr. Green, who now stands and has a rich, resonant voice both when he speaks and when he sings, told her. That Ms. Graves was like him, had first given Mr. Green the idea that he, too, could sing opera one day. She had received his class warmly when they visited her backstage, in the same room where he was now embracing her. It was a heady capstone to a major month for Mr. Green. His life story and the new book about it have been featured in recent days by “CBS This Morning,†NPR’s “Fresh Air,†and a range of newspapers including The Washington Post and The New York Post. The book, which grew out of a 2011 article that Mr. Bergner wrote for The New York Times Magazine, recounts in unsparing detail Mr. Green’s difficult childhood and family life, including his time in juvenile detention at the age of 12 for threatening his mother and brother, parts of which were spent in solitary confinement. “I’ll never forget that moment,†Mr. Green said in an interview, of being taken from his family’s home. “They shackled me, put me in shackles, and carried me out of the house as I was fighting to get back into my house. †But the book describes how he went on to turn his life around, and how, with the help of dedicated teachers, he painstakingly learned to sing opera: getting two music degrees winning the Met’s prestigious National Council Auditions in 2011 joining its demanding Lindemann Young Artist Development Program, where he had to make up for lost time in a field where many singers receive training from early childhood and joining the Vienna State Opera as a member of the ensemble. “There can be competition between singers,†Dominique Meyer, the director of the Vienna State Opera, said in an interview. “But Ryan Speedo Green came into the ensemble, and I think everyone loved him from the first day. †Sharing the painful, personal stories in the book had helped Mr. Green begin to come to terms with his history. “It was somewhat therapeutic,†he said, “because for so long I’d put my past behind me. †He said that he hoped that by sharing his story, he might inspire troubled children and their families, as well as the teachers and professionals who work with them. He has started to advocate for more funding for children’s mental health and returned with Mr. Bergner to speak with children in the detention center where he was held. He plans to go back in December. “I want them to know this is not the end,†he said, “because if I can do it, you kids surely can do it. †Mr. Bergner said that when he began the book there had been no guarantee that Mr. Green’s career would take off. But he said that Mr. Green had by then come so far that it was already an uplifting story. “I was just constantly stunned by the level of sheer will that it must have taken him,†Mr. Bergner said. “Coming out of that institution at the age of 12, living in a trailer park, with just no direction offered on how to transform himself — and yet he did. †The book also offers a candid look at race in the opera world. Mr. Green describes the pain he has felt when, after singing arias by Verdi, Puccini or Mozart, white audiences regularly ask him at recitals or parties to sing “Ol’ Man River. †He said that at a moment when the nation was confronting issues of race in so many areas, it was important to speak frankly about it in classical music. “I think it’s important to put race at the forefront if you can,†he said. “Because without talking about it, you can’t change anything. †Mr. Green, who started out in very small roles, has been working his way up to bigger — if still mostly modest — ones, like the assassin Sparafucile in “Rigoletto†and the vengeful Commendatore in “Don Giovanni. †He noted that at 30, he is still young for a and still working to establish himself in a tough field. But when Mr. Bergner, researching the book, showed him logs that the juvenile facility had kept on him, Mr. Green said it was staggering to reflect on them. “If I read that, and you asked me, ‘Where is this kid now? ’†he said, “I would never tell you they probably have two degrees and have a wife and are living in Europe and are singing at the Metropolitan Opera. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2190 | 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 Trump Accepted Defeat to Biden Due to GSA's Approval of Transition Process? Claim summaries: Losing candidates are not required to acknowledge defeat in order for a U.S. presidential transition to begin.
contextual information: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. On Nov. 23, 2020, U.S. General Services Administrator Emily Murphy, an appointee of President Donald Trump, wrote a letter to President-elect Joe Biden that allowed him to start a formal transition of power. The paperwork, obtained by Snopes and displayed below, was the first formal recognition by Trump's government of a Biden presidency. The document from the head of the General Services Administration (GSA), an executive branch agency that oversees presidential transitions, raised questions about whether it indicated that Trump himself acknowledged defeat to Biden. Concession statements to Americans or phone calls to winning candidates represent an informal step in the country's election process that typically occurs when one candidate secures the majority of electoral votes. Biden reached that milestone, winning key battleground states, including Michigan and Pennsylvania, by comfortable margins weeks before Murphy's letter. However, Trump broke democratic norms by refusing to concede publicly. Instead, the president's campaign filed a barrage of lawsuits in local jurisdictions across the country and accelerated a misinformation campaign online that denied or falsely presented the election results. While legal experts said the litigation did not contain enough evidence to reverse Biden's win, Trump's supporters viewed the effort as a commendable, tough, not-going-to-back-down approach to electoral politics. "It is not a stain on our national honor for a candidate to refuse to concede when there are open and compelling disputes about an electoral outcome," read a Nov. 23 statement by supporters of the Conservative Action Project, an initiative founded by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III. Despite not receiving Trump's concession, Biden filled his Cabinet for the White House, addressing the country under the "Office of the President Elect," and states certified the results of the popular vote in order to begin the process of voting for president through the Electoral College. Cue Murphy's letter on Nov. 23. The document fulfilled the government's obligation under the 1963 Presidential Transition Act to allow presidents-elect and their appointees, aides, and other staff—otherwise known as a transition team—to access millions of federal dollars and set up White House operations before the swearing-in ceremonies that would take place in January after general elections. Murphy submitted the paperwork after election officials in Michigan certified Biden's win there, and a conservative Republican judge in Pennsylvania shot down a Trump campaign lawsuit, The Associated Press reported. Murphy's letter stated: "Because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request. The actual winner of the presidential election will be determined by the electoral process detailed in the Constitution." In short, a member of the Trump administration, Murphy, filed paperwork to change Biden's official title in government systems to "apparent president-elect" and, as a result, granted him new privileges that only someone with that job title in the federal government receives. However, it was a misinterpretation of that procedural step to claim Trump had therefore conceded the 2020 presidential race. It is important to note that no constitutional mandate or federal law requires losing presidential candidates to acknowledge defeat for the election's processes to continue. Rather, concession speeches have been an informal tradition that often symbolizes a losing candidate's willingness to help with a peaceful transition between presidencies. In recent days, senior Trump aides, including chief of staff Mark Meadows and | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2191 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Close to the end of the March 25 testimony in the Dzhokhar Tsarnaev trial for his role in the April 25, 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, the government submitted a series of exhibits with chats from the defendant. One described wanting President Obama to win the Presidential election as the “lesser of two evils†but asserting “killing Muslims is the only promise [Obama or Mitt Romney] will fulfill.†One joked about sex even while discussing studying the Quran. Another described transferring from UMass Dartmouth (in reality, Dzhokhar was already failing out), joking about transferring to an Ivy League school, but ending by saying “I wanna bring justice for my people.†These were chats with no context, simply read by an FBI agent, without even any guidance about with whom Dzhokhar was chatting.
About the only one that made sense was one from December 25, 2012 that read “Doing something with Tamerlan,†Dzhokhar’s older brother who would go on to be killed in a police shoot out after the attack. “I’ll hit you up in a bit bro.â€
But when the defense tried to introduce related chats, noting how religious Tamerlan had become and explaining that the older brother had influenced Dzhokhar so much he had been sober for a month, the witness said he wasn’t sure it was about Dzhokhar’s older brother.
It was just an example of the degree to which the prosecution in the marathon trial are cherry picking narrowly from the complex cultural world of Dzhokhar, a Chechen immigrant who grew up steeped in American culture in Cambridge, MA.
Twice, the prosecution got caught in efforts to cherry pick too narrowly. On Tuesday, terrorism consultant Matthew Levitt took the stand to “decode†the boat on which Dzhokhar had tried to “shed some light†on his and his brother’s actions, showing confidently how everything Dzhokhar wrote on the boat must have derived from propaganda he had read written by Anwar al-Awlaki, the Yemeni-American cleric whose work has continued to exercise influence years after the US killed him in a drone strike. But the defense got Levitt to admit that — along with not speaking Arabic — Levitt had only reviewed the Awlaki related materials from Dzhokhar’s computer, considering neither the Quran nor Chechen culture in his analysis. Levitt also admitted to being paid $450 an hour for analysis that consisted of connecting dots that came pre-selected for him from the prosecution.
Evidence submitted by the defense on March 31 revealed that Dzhokhar had spent more time at Pornhub, Craigslist, Manga sites, and free TV downloads than anything extremist (though that doesn’t account for what he was doing on Facebook or the Russian equivalent, VKontakte, the two sites where he spent most of his time). The defense also submitted evidence that suggests someone moved the Al Qaeda magazine Inspire to Dzhokhar’s computer the morning he left for Russia on January 21, 2012, which may have been an effort to clear it from Tamerlan’s computer before any border crossings where his computer might be searched.
On March 10, a different FBI Agent, Stephen Kimball, read and interpreted Dzhokhar’s tweets. “I shall die young†said one. “September 10th baby, you know what tomorrow is. Party at my house!†After he had presented Dzhokhar’s online life as if everything presaged jihad, defense attorney Miriam Conrad exposed how little he understood. A Russian rap song, a Comedy Central skit, a soccer team, all presented as something else. Kimball hadn’t even clicked through Dzhokhar’s links on some of the tweets, which would have made the source clear. Nor did he check pictures before he declared a picture of a mosque to be Mecca; according to the defense, it was actually Grozny, Chechnya’s capital. He had, until being called on it by the defense, simply been parroting a narrative written by the prosecution. And it’s not just Dzhokhar’s online life that has been reduced to one flat interpretation. The defense briefly pointed out that a hard drive belonging to Tamerlan included Russian bombing materials, in addition to Awlaki materials. That was excluded from the testimony. None of this has an impact on guilt or innocence. “It was him,†Dzhokhar’s lawyer Judy Clarke started her opening argument, admitting her client had laid a bomb at the race that maimed and killed horribly. Dzhokhar will surely spend the rest of his life in prison, if he’s not executed. And yet the government has gone to great lengths to tell a simplistic story of two brothers who read some online magazines by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, made some bombs in the kitchen once used by their mother, and then killed three and injured hundreds at the marathon (this, in spite of the fact that the prosecution has presented ambiguous evidence about how the most lethal bombs used at the marathon were made). Dzhokhar — and in those moments when he gets mentioned anymore, Tamerlan — are presented as foreign terrorists responding to Arabic propaganda, not even Chechen ones, because that doesn’t fit the easy narrative the public is being presented. All those parts of Dzhokhar’s rap-listening, dope-smoking life that make him a quintessential American have been left unmentioned. Yet that American side to Dzhokhar committed this crime as surely as the propaganda written in Yemen did. Again, none of this will change the guilty verdict. What it will do, however, is sustain a fiction the FBI and the prosecution seem to want to preserve badly, that discovering terrorists, even retroactively, is a matter of simply decoding pre-selected dots rather than complex understanding. Discovering terrorists, in this flattened narrative, is about rooting out the foreign rather than discovering the terrorism that might be very much part of America. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2192 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Austria s president warned conservative election victor Sebastian Kurz that European values must underpin the next government and he would scrutinize developments as Kurz considers bringing the far right back into power. Kurz s People s Party (OVP) won Sunday s parliamentary election with a hard line on immigration that left little daylight between it and the far-right Freedom Party, two years after Austria was swept up in Europe s migration crisis. The OVP secured about 31.5 percent of the vote, well short of a majority. A coalition with the FPO is far from certain but appears the most likely outcome after Kurz called an end to the OVP s previous coalition with the Social Democrats. Kurz, 31, has given little away about what he plans to do. The FPO was founded by ex-Nazis in the 1950s and first became a major political force in the 1990s under the charismatic Joerg Haider, who praised Hitler s employment policies. Haider led the party to a record parliamentary election score in 1999 that it came close to matching on Sunday. The FPO says it has put its Nazi past behind it and purged its ranks of anti-Semitism, but still frequently has to expel members for anti-Semitic comments. It has, however, stopped calling for Austria to leave the European Union. I will ensure that the fundamental European values inscribed in our constitution remain the compass for Austria s future, President Alexander Van der Bellen said on Tuesday as he received the outgoing coalition government, which will stay on in a caretaker role until a successor is formed. Austria s president holds a largely ceremonial post but has the power to appoint and dismiss governments, and can be an influential figure in forming coalitions. I will check policy objectives but also staffing proposals very closely, Van der Bellen added. What that means for a potential tie-up between Kurz and the FPO is unclear but Van der Bellen, a former leader of the leftist Greens, is known to have reservations about the far-right party. Van der Bellen narrowly beat an FPO candidate in a presidential election run-off last year, campaigning on a pro-European platform. During his campaign he said that as president he would seek to prevent FPO leader Heinz-Christian Strache from becoming chancellor if the FPO won an election, but since taking office he has said only that the next government must be pro-European. The FPO cheered Britain s 2016 vote to leave the EU and even sketched out a case in which Austria might hold its own Oexit referendum on leaving the bloc. But the anti-immigrant party has since backed away from that position given that a clear majority of Austrians support EU membership. It now describes itself as pro-European but still criticizes the EU, calling for Brussels to hand back more powers to member states. That stance overlaps with Kurz s, since the OVP has called for a streamlined EU that focuses on core competencies like internal trade and securing external borders. Kurz has also said that any coalition partner must be pro-European, although whether he and Van der Bellen agree on what that means is unclear. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2193 | 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: Three Former Presidents Mocked Trump on Twitter? Claim summaries: A satire site published doctored images that appeared to show former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking President Trump's tweet about winning the election on his "first try."
contextual information: In January 2018, shortly after the publication of the book *Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House*, which suggested that President Trump was unfit for office, the President took to Twitter to defend his mental stability: "Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart. Crooked Hillary Clinton also played these cards very hard and, as everyone knows, went down in flames. I went from VERY successful businessman to top T.V. star... to President of the United States (on my first try). I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius... and a very stable genius at that!" Trump's tweets sparked a flurry of political punditry and provided fodder for comedians. On January 8, 2018, the Facebook page "Politicked" published an image purportedly showing former presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton mocking Trump's claim that he became President of the United States on his first try. Politicked describes itself as a "left-wing political satire" group that creates its own "original and biting memes." The images of these purported tweets are fake. We searched the Twitter timelines for Obama, Bush, and Clinton and did not find any of these messages. It is also unlikely that the three former presidents posted and subsequently deleted the tweets. Messages sent from President Obama and Clinton are routinely retweeted thousands of times (Bush hasn't used the service since 2010), yet we found no retweets linking back to the original messages. Furthermore, it would be highly unlikely for these three former presidents to coordinate a social media joke simply to mock President Trump, only to get cold feet and delete their posts without being detected by a mainstream media source. It is true that Obama, Clinton, and Bush all won presidential elections on their first attempts. Trump's claim that he won the presidency on his first try, however, is a matter of debate regarding how serious one considers his first attempt. He ran for the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000 and appeared on the primary ballot in two states, but Trump withdrew from the race before the election. Although the 2000 campaign was the only time Trump actually entered any primary races prior to 2016, the real estate mogul toyed with the idea so often that his political aspirations found their way onto the popular cartoon show *The Simpsons*. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2194 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Radio Aryan October 29, 2016
Matthew Heimbach brings us the last show of the week accompanied by Jason Augustus and special guest Jeff Schoep from the National Socialist Movement. Jeff tells us how he has been involved in White Nationalism for around 25 years and reminds us of the sacrifices that many good men have made over that time to promote our cause, being imprisoned or physically attacked for their beliefs. The NSM is a political movement as well as being involved in street activism, so they are involved in a lot of community outreach work. Jeff talks about how their roots go back to George Lincoln Rockwell and the only groups that have legitimate ties to his movement are the New Order and the NSM. He was taught by the people who had learned from him and public service was always a part of what they were doing.
Jason asks what it was like to be a political skinhead involved in National Socialism and what changes he has seen in his time. Years ago a fight just used to be a fight, but nowadays you can be hit with hate crime charges as well, which can lead to lengthy prison sentences and ruined lives, just for a fistfight that may not have even involved racial politics. You cannot even defend your life any more without being charged with hate crime, as we have seen recently in Britain, where activists have received serious jail time for defending themselves against violent antifa in Kent. Jeff is banned from Britain as well as Matt, not due to any criminal activity but just because his speech is politically incorrect. Matt reminds us that the reason for this is because they have no answer to our talking points. They cannot debate us so they always seek to shut us down.
The NSM will be taking an important role in the new Nationalist Front alliance with the TWP and Jeff talks about previous attempts to do this before, where good people have tried to broker a peace between the various organisations but due to petty reasons were never able to achieve it. He explains how the main problem has always been personality issues, where people have an issue with someone and then make up stories about them to cause problems.
The TWP and the NSM will be at a national rally together at the state capital of Pennsylvania on November 5th and all are welcome, especially other organisations. Jeff reminds us that although it is good to be promoting stuff on the internet, real political change has always been made on the streets. He suggests that if people are worried of being caught on camera, they should just wear a hat and sunglasses. Matt points out that he has never met anyone at an event that he has ever then gone on to have problems with on the internet.
For the last part of the podcast Jeff talks about how he has worked to modernise the NSM, distancing them from German symbols and concentrating on American ones instead. He has taken some flak for this but believes that if we want to win, then we will have to start taking risks, after all, who dares wins.
Presented by Matthew Heimbach and Jason Augustus with special guest Jeff Schoep
The Daily Traditionalist: Jeff Schoep and the NSM â DT 102816 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2195 | 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: Wayne Allyn Root -- Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide Claim summaries: Wayne Allyn Root opined that President Obama will lose his re-election bid in 2012 by a landslide.
contextual information: Wayne Allyn Root opined that President Obama will lose his re-election bid in 2012 by a landslide. Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian vice-presidential nominee and a well-known Vegas oddsmaker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races. Neither Obama nor Romney is my horse in the race. I believe both Republicans and Democrats have destroyed the U.S. economy and brought us to the edge of economic disaster. My vote will go to Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson in November, whom I believe has the most fiscally conservative track record of any governor in modern U.S. political history. Without the bold spending cuts of a Gary Johnson or Ron Paul, I don't believe it's possible to turn around America. But as an oddsmaker with a remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December, I released my New Year's predictions. I predicted back then—before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt—that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day, but that on election day, Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980. Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. Thirty-two years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by nine points to Carter. Romney is currently running even in the polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge? Origins: Wayne Allyn Root, a political commentator who was the Libertarian Party's 2008 vice-presidential candidate, is a regular contributor to FOX News and the author of several books, including The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts. He writes political opinion columns published on Townhall.com, and his entry for 30 May 2012 was the article excerpted above, entitled "Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide." Last updated: 11 June 2012. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2196 | 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 Disarmed Soldiers on Military Bases? Claim summaries: Rumor: President Bill Clinton issued an executive order disarming soldiers on military bases.
contextual information: Claim: President Bill Clinton issued an executive order disarming soldiers on military bases. Example: [Collected via e-mail, August 2010] Is it true that "one of the first things Bill Clinton did in office was to issue an executive order disarming soldiers on military bases"? Origins: The wake of the September 2013 fatal shooting of 12 people by a civilian military contractor who went on a rampage at Washington Navy Yard saw the recirculation of a rumor that gained currency after the November 2009 fatal shooting of 13 people by a U.S. Army psychiatrist at Fort Hood, Texas: that one of the reasons these mass shooters had not been stopped earlier in their killing sprees was because President Bill Clinton had issued an executive order back in 1993 that prohibited personnel on military bases from carrying firearms while on duty. While there was at least a small kernel of real information underlying such claims, the gist of the rumor was wrong on two major counts. It was during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, not Bill Clinton, that the U.S. Department of Defense issued a directive in February 1992 affecting the carrying of firearms on bases by military personnel. That directive was eventually implemented through a regulation 190-14 issued by the Department of the Army (not via executive order) in March 1993, just two months after President Clinton assumed office. directive regulation Additionally, that change in regulations (which applied only to the Army, not other branches of the U.S. armed forces) did not ban the carrying of weapons by soldiers on Army bases; rather, it restricted the authorization to carry firearms to personnel engaged in law enforcement and security duties, and to personnel stationed at facilities where there was "a reasonable expectation that life or Army assets would be jeopardized if firearms were not carried": a. The authorization to carry firearms will be issued only to qualified personnel when there is a reasonable expectation that life or Department of the Army (DA) assets will be jeopardized if firearms are not carried. Evaluation of the necessity to carry a firearm will be made considering this expectation weighed against the possible consequences of accidental or indiscriminate use of firearms. b. DA personnel regularly engaged in law enforcement or security duties will be armed. c. DA personnel are authorized to carry firearms while engaged in security duties, protecting personnel and vital Government assets, or guarding prisoners. Others noted that the change in policy likely had little actual effect on day-to-day base operations: Steven Bucci, a military expert for The Heritage Foundation who served 28 years in the Army and retired in 2005 with the rank of colonel, also [said] that Clinton is not to blame. "I think you are barking up the wrong tree if you are looking to put blame on someone for disarming the military," said Bucci, when asked if Clinton was responsible. "I think that's kind of a bogus story." "We have never had our soldiers walking around with weapons all the time, other than in combat zones," he added, noting only Military Police have had that authority. Last updated: 16 July 2015 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2197 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Earlier in the week, we covered a study from Wharton School professor J. Scott Armstrong and Dr. Kesten Green which claims that only a fraction of 1 percent of the papers published in scientific journals follow the scientific method. Professor Armstrong appeared on Breitbart News Daily today to discuss his research with Alex Marlow. [“The problem in journals, with government research, and with universities is that nobody asks them to follow [it]. I’ve been publishing for 55 years and can’t ever recall anyone saying ‘you should follow the scientific method. ’†Armstrong, along with Dr Kesten Green developed a checklist of eight criteria to assess whether a paper or a study follows the scientific method. According to the checklist, scientific studies must (1) test multiple reasonable hypotheses, (2) provide useful findings, (3) fully disclose methods, data, and other relevant information, (4) conduct a comprehensive review of prior knowledge, (5) use valid and comparable data, (6) use valid and simple methods, (7) provide any experimental evidence, (8) reach conclusions consistent with the evidence. “So, [Dr.] Kesten Green and I got involved with this to develop a simple checklist that would help people to say ‘are you following the scientific method?’ If you’re going to fly a plane, if you’re going to be a doctor and operate, you have to use a checklist, and if you use a checklist you are much more effective. Nothing like that exists right now. †“There is one exception, and that is PLOS One, Public Library of Science One actually provides a checklist. I think it took them about five years before they became the largest scientific journal in the world, so they’ve really revolutionized things. †“What’s happening now is, government research, universities — they’re asking for what I call advocacy research. They have something, they want you to prove it, make sure you prove it, you do, you keep getting paid. †“Advocacy research is the bulk of these 99 percent of studies, and they’re not done for scientific development, they’re done to support a political idea. If you want to make money in universities these days, you publish papers that support global warming and you live handsomely. †Armstrong said that the problem of research had been a problem since at least the 1920s, but that it has intensified in recent years with the “vast growth of government funding for research. †“I agree with many of the greats of the past when I say that the government should not be involved in research. †Armstrong reiterated his argument that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) violates all eight of his checklist for following the scientific method. “If you don’t believe me, you can go and look at their work and you can use that checklist. †Listen to Professor Armstrong’s full discussion with Alex Marlow below. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2198 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Vatican on Wednesday defended Pope Francis s decision not to use the word Rohingya in public during his visit to Myanmar, saying his moral authority was unblemished and that his mere presence drew attention to the refugee crisis. But at a news conference, the Holy See s spokesman also acknowledged that Vatican diplomacy was not infallible and that others were entitled to their views. The pope leaves on Thursday for Bangladesh, where about 625,000 Muslim Rohingya from predominantly Buddhist Myanmar have fled following a military crackdown in Rakhine state. He is due to meet Rohingya refugees there. Since he arrived in Myanmar, Francis has studiously avoided the highly charged term, following advice of local Church officials. They feared it could set off a diplomatic incident and turn Myanmar s military and government against minority Christians. Even though his calls for justice, human rights and respect were widely seen as applicable to the Rohingya, who are not recognized as citizens or as members of a distinct ethnicity, rights groups such as Amnesty International said they were disappointed. I think it was pretty clear from the local concerns that the pope was going to take the advice very seriously in public, Vatican spokesman Greg Burke said at the news conference, which was also with several Myanmar bishops. That doesn t take away from anything the pope has said in the past, or from anything he says in private, Burke said. The fact of the matter that the pope is here and draws attention to the country itself is an incredibly positive thing. Scores of Rohingya villages were burnt to the ground, and refugees arriving in Bangladesh told of killings and rapes. Washington said last week that the military s campaign included horrendous atrocities aimed at ethnic cleansing . Myanmar s military has denied accusations of murder, rape and forced displacement. The government blames the crisis on the Rohingya militants, whom it has condemned as terrorists. Everyone s entitled to their own opinion here. Nobody ever said Vatican diplomacy s infallible, Burke said when asked if the Vatican had any second thoughts about the decision for the pope not to use the word. He said the aim of Vatican diplomacy was building bridges and seek discussions as brothers, which often take place behind closed doors . This suggested the pope, who has defended Rohingya by name before in Rome, may have used the term in private during meeting in Myanmar. The pope, Burke said, was not afraid of minefields, but he could not just parachute in to areas to solve crises. I find it really hard to think that the moral authority of the pope has somehow diminished. People are not expected to solve impossible problems, Burke said. The moral of the pope stands. You ll see him go ahead and you can criticize what is said and what is not said, but the pope is not going to lose moral authority on this question, he said. Asked about the accusations of ethnic cleansing, Bishop John Hsane Hgyi said I did not see it with my own eyes. I don t know if its true or not . When she came to power in 2016, Nobel peace laureate and longtime champion of democracy Aung San Suu Kyi said her top priority was ending ethnic conflicts that have kept Myanmar in a state of near-perpetual civil war since independence in 1948. That goal remains elusive and, although Suu Kyi remains popular at home, she has faced a barrage of international criticism for expressing doubts about reports of rights abuses against Rohingya and failing to condemn the military. Although Suu Kyi formed Myanmar s first civilian government in half a century, her defenders say she is hamstrung by a constitution written by the military that left the army in control of security and much of the apparatus of the state. The military s power was clear on Monday when its leader, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, demanded to meet the pope before Sun Kyi, upending the planned schedule, which had her meeting the pontiff first. I m sure the pope would have preferred meeting the general after he had done the official visits, Burke said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2199 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Ezekiel Emanuel laughed on Wednesday as the hosts of MSNBC’s Morning Joe joked about his brainchild, Obamacare, which on Tuesday Emanuel noted was going to cause severe fiscal pain for at least a million Americans.
On Wednesday’s show, Mika Brzezinski noted that Emanuel, a former adviser to President Barack Obama is “often called one of the architects of the Affordable Care Act.”
“How’s that working for you right now, Zeke?” chimed in host Joe Scarborough.
Related Stories Bill Clinton Leads Crowd In Litany Of Obamacare’s Failures Scarborough: Everything Republicans Predicted About Obamacare Is Coming True New Data Shows Double-Digit Rate Hikes For Obamacare Emanuel grinned while on remote from Philadelphia.
“Be honest, though,” Scarborough continued. “Zeke only worked on the part of the Affordable Care Act that’s causing increases 25 percent on average.”
Emanuel was once again all smiles.
A day before, there were not many smiles when Emanual appeared on CNN and told Jake Tapper the extent of Obamacare’s fiscal effects.
“There’s a million people for whom this is going to be severe or uncomfortable,” he said.
Earlier this week, the Obama administration announced that the average premium costs will rise 25 percent next year. However, some states were far higher. A popular “ silver” healthcare plan is scheduled to increase 116 percent in Arizona; 40 percent in North Carolina; and 53 percent in Pennsylvania.
Emanuel said the problem of rising premiums some Americans will have trouble affording is just part of the way Obamacare evolved.
Trending Stories Frustrated With Media Bias, Trump Campaign Takes Its Case Directly To Voters With Nightly Show On Facebook RNC Official Takes CNN Host To Task For Claiming There Is No Media Bias Independent Voters Push Trump To The Front In Florida And Ohio “Everyone who worked on the bill thought that it was not perfect, and six years in, some of the problems, some of the unintended consequences are manifesting themselves. That doesn’t mean it’s fatal,” he said.
“These price increases that we’re seeing this year are a one-time increase relative to the fact that insurance companies didn’t know who was going to come in, under-priced their premiums in the first few years, and are readjusting them based on who’s in the marketplace,” said Emanuel, suggesting that tweaking the system will fix the problem.
” … it’s what any company would do if they launch a product, some problems arise, and you try to fix them,” he said.
#ObamacareFail pic.twitter.com/90Aixp25Oc
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 25, 2016
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump would prefer to throw out Obamacare rather than fine-tune it.
“Obamacare has to be repealed and replaced ,” Trump said Tuesday.
What do you think? | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.