id
stringlengths 4
7
| query
stringlengths 166
33.3k
| answer
stringclasses 3
values | choices
sequencelengths 3
3
| gold
int64 0
2
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
FMD3200 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Shawn Helton 21st Century WireWith the United States in the heat of the 2016 presidential election cycle, key questions surrounding the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia continue to persist as there s a new conspiratorial twist added to an already suspicious case.Recently, here at 21WIRE, we discussed many of the strange circumstances observed in the aftermath of Justice Scalia s death. The 79-year-old conservative justice was found dead in his hotel room at Cibolo Creek Ranch, a luxury ranch located in Presidio County, Texas.There was no official autopsy made by a medical examiner in Scalia s death, only a controversial pronouncement over the phone by Presidio County Judge Cinderela Guevara.As 21WIRE pointed out in an earlier report regarding Scalia, Guevara appears to have reversed her previous statement claiming that Scalia had died of a heart attack , revising the cause of death to natural causes. Guevara s handling of the death scene of a Supreme Court Justice without being present has drawn sharp criticism from both the media and the public. ORIGINAL MEANING Controversial conservative firebrand, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. (Photo illustration 21WIRE)Secret Order, Secret Death?On February 24th, The Washington Post published an article entitled Justice Scalia spent his last hours with members of this secretive society of elite hunters : When Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died 12 days ago at a West Texas ranch, he was among high-ranking members of an exclusive fraternity for hunters called the International Order of St. Hubertus, an Austrian society that dates back to the 1600s. Continuing, The Washington Post confirmed that indeed, the FBI will not be conducting an investigation into Supreme Court Justice Scalia s death. On an interesting note however, the article states that the FBI was unaware of the secretive international order all together: Law enforcement officials told The Post that they had no knowledge of the International Order of St. Hubertus or its connection to Poindexter and ranch guests. The officials said the FBI had declined to investigate Scalia s death when they were told by the marshals that he died from natural causes. CLOAK & DAGGER Members of The International Order of Saint Hubertus, from left: John Kotts, Boysie Bollinger, Vidal Martinez, Reed Morian and John Poindexter. (Photo link chron)The Washington Post article also revealed the identity of Scalia s travel partners: C. Allen Foster, a prominent Washington lawyer who traveled to the ranch with Scalia by private plane, and that Cibolo Creek Ranch owner John Poindexter, along with C. Allen Foster, had flown with Scalia to the ranch for the now infamous quail-hunting trip.Also according to the Post, both Poindexter and Foster, hold leadership positions within the [Saint Hubertus] Order. It is unclear what, if any, official association Scalia had with the group. While the Post acknowledged that many of the 35 guests in attendance at Cibolo Creek Ranch have remained largely unknown to the public eye, they discuss some of the details surrounding the St. Hubertus order, an international brotherhood whose founding member, Count Franz Anton von Sporck , also started a branch of Freemasonry in Bohemia (now the Czech Republic): Members of the worldwide, male-only society wear dark-green robes emblazoned with a large cross and the motto Deum Diligite Animalia Diligentes, which means Honoring God by honoring His creatures, according to the group s website. The conspiratorial coincidence doesn t end there, it was also revealed that The society s [Saint Hubertus] U.S. chapter launched in 1966 at the famous Bohemian Club in San Francisco. CIBOLO CONSPIRACY What really happened to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. (Photo link twitter)Magic Bullets Become Magic Pillows Another bizarre element to this story, was the description and discovery of Scalia s body when it was first found by Cibolo Creek ranch owner, Poindexter. This aspect of the story is illustrated very clearly in a passage from the blog Followship of the Minds: On February 14, 2016, in an article for mySA (MySanAntonio) titled, Texas Ranch owner recalls Scalia s last hours, reporter John MacCormack quoted Poindexter: We discovered the judge in bed, a pillow over his head.Everything was in perfect order. He was in his pajamas, peacefully, in bed. His bed clothes were unwrinkled. He was lying very restfully. It looked like he had not quite awakened from a nap. On February 17, Poindexter clarified his comment to the New York Daily News that There was a pillow over his head, not over his face. The face was entirely clear. And now, the latest.David Warren reports for the AP that according to a Presidio County Sheriff s Office incident report obtained by The Washington Post on Feb. 23, nothing appeared out of place around Scalia s bed. Three pillows were stacked to elevate Scalia s head. A top pillow appeared to have toppled onto his eyes and forehead but didn t appear positioned to impede his breathing. Scalia s arms were at his side atop the bed covers, which were pulled up to his chin. The bed covers were smooth and creased and showed no sign of a struggle. That is one magic pillow!First, it was over Scalia s head.Then, it was above Scalia s head, whose face was entirely clear .Now, the pillow is neither over nor above Scalia s head, but partially covering his face ( toppled onto his eyes and forehead ), although the pillow made sure to position itself so as not to impede his breathing . SECRETS IN CIBOLO The scenic surroundings of Cibolo Creek Ranch. (Photo link tripadvisor)While you have to wonder about the confusion surrounding Scalia s pillow placement, The Washington Post s recent eye-opening revelations regarding the Order of St. Hubertus give us some other things to consider Silencing Conspiracy with ConspiracyThe overtly conspiracy-tinged Post piece is a rarity in the mainstream world, one that conjure s many Hollywood or government tales of murder, deception and intrigue throughout history.The acknowledgement of a decadent Eyes Wide Shut-like secret society on location at Cibolo Creek Ranch prior to Scalia s death, only enhances the drive by voyeurism witnessed since his passing and in a way, it could undermine any legitimate investigation into his death after the fact.While its true, this compelling new detail will most likely bring its lion s share of political protest, as well as predictable calls for congressional inquiry or a push for a federal investigation (as should be) the heavily publicized presence of a secretive fraternal order of hunters nearby a suspicious crime scene, will unfortunately fuel more speculation.Put another way: Whether or not the secret group at Cibolo Creek Ranch was involved in Scalia s death, you have to wonder why the mainstream media revealed this latest conspiratorial element in the first place.Media gatekeepers in television, print and radio will have a field day with this new controversial piece, all the while pushing and pulling the population into a particular corner and by the looks of it, that s already happening.Having said all of this however, there s still much to be concerned with regarding Scalia s highly suspicious death OBAMA NO-SHOW The funeral service for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Oddly, President Obama elected not to attend. (Photo link detroitnewstime)Big Questions RemainOver the years, Scalia s various political connections and political perspective on important issues earned him a controversial reputation.In 2014, Justice Scalia drew harsh criticism for his views on the CIA torture debate, when the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on the interrogation techniques used since the 9/11 attacks.Whether you agreed or disagreed with Scalia, it s important to note once again that the high court has several pending landmark cases on climate, abortion and immigration, all within weeks or months of his death.The NY Post s recent article entitled Scalia could have been poisoned: forensic pathologist, raised even more questions about the state of Scalia s body upon being discovered: Lethal poisoning could have left Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia s body in virtually the same condition in which it was found, a top forensic pathologist [Dr. Michael Baden] told The Post on Wednesday. For the time being, were left to wonder what other secrets lie in Cibolo Creek Ranch regarding the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia READ MORE ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2016 Files | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3201 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Silly, silly Donna Brazile. She s publishing a book detailing turmoil in the Democratic Party during the 2016 campaign, highlighted by her concern that Hillary Clinton was seriously ill and might need to be replaced by Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders.Was the Democrat Party setting up Joe Biden to replace Hillary when she accompanied him to his hometown in Scranton, PA? The media completely ignored Hillary s inability to walk or stand unassisted in front of, and inside Joe s childhood home, that was all caught on this incredible, but mostly hidden video. In the video below, Hillary can be seen using the arm of the homeowner for support while reaching for the railing next to the stairs to stabilize herself. She can be seen repeatedly grasping for the railing outside, and then later on, when Hillary s inside the home, she seems unable to stand on her own, as she grasps for the backs of chairs and the kitchen table.Watch:Earlier in the day, Vice President Joe Biden was forced to help the seriously ill Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton down from the podium where she spoke at a small rally.What s the big deal? There s no news here because all this was well-known and covered at the time by the big national newspapers and networks, right?Wrong. If Brazile were rehashing things we knew, there would be no book and no bombshell headlines now.Instead, she has thrown open a new and very big window on 2016 and exposed yet again the consequences of the political biases of the Democratic media.The missed stories are not merely the result of mistakes or sloppy reporting. Brazile s book is a revelation in that it shows that many left-leaning journalists didn t so much cover Clinton as cover up for her.Put it this way: How is it possible that the leader of the Democratic Party was talking to colleagues about trying to replace its nominee during the general election because of health concerns, and none of the thousands of journalists covering the campaign got wind of it?It s not possible if the media had been playing it down the middle and holding both candidates to the same standard of scrutiny. But big media missed a big story because so much campaign news coverage was tilted toward defeating Donald Trump and electing Clinton.Anything that could possibly suggest Trump was unfit for the Oval Office bingo, front page, top of the broadcast.On the other hand, anything that could hurt Clinton was downplayed or ignored. Nothing to see here, move along.The coverage of Clinton s health was a prime example of the tilt. Her coughing fits, especially a long one on Labor Day, and a history of falling were pointed out by the popular Drudge Report, some Republicans and smaller, conservative-leaning sites to suggest she was not being honest about her health.But her campaign always denied anything was wrong allergies, the candidate, and her flacks insisted, caused the persistent coughs, and major news organizations mostly nodded their heads and stayed mum, accepting the official denials without skepticism.The dam cracked a bit on Labor Day, when an NBC reporter filed a 91-word, four-paragraph story that said Clinton had been unable to finish her speech in Ohio because of a coughing fit.The truth was dangerous, so the Praetorian Guard sprang to Clinton s defense. The NBC reporter, Andrew Rafferty, was mocked and insulted, first by the campaign, and then by journalists, including some MSNBC commentators who turned on their colleague as if he had violated a secret oath.CNN joined the Clinton amen chorus, and at the Washington Post, political writer Chris Cillizza denounced the topic of Clinton s health as a totally ridiculous issue and declared it a sure-fire loser for Trump. It s hard to plausibly insist, based on the available data, that Clinton is ill, insisted Cillizza, who is now at CNN.Five days later, Clinton was unable to walk on her own and collapsed at the 9/11 ceremony in Manhattan as she tried to get into a van. The campaign insisted she was just dehydrated until a short video of the incident aired, then admitted the candidate had been diagnosed with pneumonia days earlier.In other words, the claim of allergies was a big fat lie. That prompted Brazile to contemplate starting the process of replacing Clinton, writing in her book that the campaign also was anemic and had the odor of failure. She says she considered numerous tickets to replace Clinton and Sen. Tim Kane, and decided that Biden and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) would be the best.It s not clear how long she deliberated or how many people she talked to, but Brazile writes that Biden called her on Sept. 12. In the end, she says, she made no move because she couldn t disappoint Clinton s supporters.For entire story: NYP | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3202 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 14th Anniversary of His Passing By Joachim Hagopian
On October 25th, 2002 the last great hero of the common people in the US Senate was very likely murdered by agents of the shadow US crime cabal government otherwise known as the Bush-Cheney regime. His wife and daughter and two pilots also died in the air crash. Paul Wellstone’s story deserves to be retold and Americans need to be reminded that criminals in and out of our government still need to be punished for their unindicted crimes. This article was written as both a tribute to an outstanding American patriot and a reexamination of his probable assassination by criminals still on the loose.
Minnesota Democratic Senator Paul Wellstone was a man of integrity who was among the few politicians openly and adamantly opposing the Iraq invasion as well as the creation of the US version of Gestapo-land Security. As a fearless populist leader he’d been a constant thorn in the side ever since then President George H. W. Bush responding to the junior senator’s uncomfortable questions at a reception asked, “Who is this chickenshit?”
Years later as the only senator up for reelection who voted against the Iraq War when Democrats held just a one seat edge over the Republicans in the Senate (with one independent caucusing with Democrats), his thorny side made him the #1 GOP target . With the Karl Rove led Republican Party just one seat away from gaining Republican control over the US Senate, Wellstone’s death gave his Republican challenger Norm Coleman the 49-49 split and, as the President of the Senate, Cheney’s tie breaking vote would deliver the GOP 50-49 advantage needed to steamroll yet more tax cuts through for the rich, unending bankers’ wars and a never seen before boom for the military-security industrial complex. Again, motive and means tilt heavily towards assassination. The facts make it more than probable.
A month prior to the November 2002 election Vice President Cheney had arranged a meeting with Wellstone, threatening him with grave consequences should he vote against the preplanned Iraq invasion. A few days later speaking to a group of war veterans, Wellstone publicly recalled Cheney’s threatening words :
“If you vote against the war in Iraq, the Bush administration will do whatever is necessary to get you. There will be severe ramifications for you and the state of Minnesota.”
Then just days after that, 11 days prior to the midterm election and a year to the exact day after the deadly anthrax pushed Patriot Act victory , on October 25th Paul Wellstone, his wife and daughter along with three staffers and two pilots all died in an extremely suspicious plane crash.
The FBI was at the crash site within 90 minutes , indicating they’d left their Minneapolis office before the “accident” at about the same time Wellstone’s plane was just taking off that morning, indicating the possibility of pre-knowledge.
“The authors note that it would’ve taken agents at least three hours to reach the swampy and remote crash site. How they got there from the Twin Cities so quickly remains a mystery”.
Additionally, the NTSB as the national agency that normally takes the lead role investigating all US plane crashes suddenly wasn’t. The FBI moved in ahead immediately proclaiming just another bad weather accident. Yet all on the ground witnesses and reports disagree, from pilots landing at the destination airport just two hours prior to the Wellstone flight to the airport manager who less than an hour after the crash was himself flying over the crash site. The plane considered a Rolls Royce among small planes was in tiptop shape and the two pilots steeped in skilled experience.
As the feds’ rogue cops for go-to cover-ups, as in 9/11 and the anthrax attacks the year before, and the 1993 World Trade Center and 1995 Oklahoma City bombing s, the FBI has a long shady history of leaving its corrupt dirty fingerprints all over these well documented false flag, history changing events.
A couple of brave Democratic House members anonymously stated that they believe Wellstone was murdered. In one Congressman’s words :
I don’t think there’s anyone on the Hill who doesn’t suspect it. It’s too convenient, too coincidental, too damned obvious. My guess is that some of the less courageous members of the party are thinking about becoming Republicans right now.
An unnamed CIA source admitted :
Having played ball (and still playing in some respects) with this current crop of reinvigorated old white men, these clowns are nobody to screw around with. There will be a few more strategic accidents. You can be certain of that.
A number of other Democratic politicians at a 2 to 1 margin to Republicans have also incurred mysterious deaths holding “unpopular” views just ahead of hotly contested elections. Two years earlier while traveling in Colombia Senator Wellstone had already experienced one known attempt on his life when a bomb planted enroute from the airport was discovered. Since that plot failed, he was then sprayed with the highly toxic poison glyphosate.
As a longtime critic of the CIA and covert operations, Wellstone was targeted for assassination in both Colombia and in Minnesota by the masters of mayhem, murder and deceitful cover-ups – the FBI/CIA Criminals-In-Action at the behest of mastermind Cheney.
So far in our two-tiered justice system, murder pays off for those high up on the psychopath food chain like Cheney, the Bushes and Clintons . Renowned investigative reporter Seymour Hersh exposed Cheney’s “executive assassination ring.” Cheney used the CIA as well as the military Joint Special Operations Command as his personal army of hitmen reporting directly to him. (see video below)
If the neocons can live with themselves for murdering 3000 Americans on 9/11, they certainly never lose sleep over a few more targeted eliminations that include the genocidal 4 million Muslim bloodbath caused by the Bush crime family wars.
The heavy-handed Bush-Cheney push for Iraq War and a DHS congressional vote prior to their 2003 invasion cast enormous high stakes in the Senate. Then add the known history of contempt from former CIA director Bush, the Cheney threat just days prior to Wellstone’s death, a slew of brazenly contradictory crash site anomalies , and the exposed murderous means used to pass the Patriot Act and the 9/11 false flag tragedy the year prior, all of this circumstantial evidence taken together strongly points to yet more diabolical skullduggery perpetrated by Skull & Bones criminals against humanity.
The neocons grabbed the Hegelian solution they needed for waging unlimited war in the name of terrorism anywhere in the world while simultaneously at home merging FEMA into their newly created Homeland Security tasked with stripping away the rest of America’s constitutional liberties in the name of “national security.” In its first dozen years alone, deep state’s gluttonously monolithic DHS cancer has metastasized into the third largest federal department boasting near a quarter million fulltime employees. By hook, crook and murder the Cheney-Bush gang in 2003 got what they’d been wanting and plotting for years, two concurrent never-ending wars in the Middle East and the monstrous apparatus Homeland Security whose purpose is making war against the American people. Sadly the rest of the Western vassal nations play follow the leader.
If examined according to the Hegelian Dialectic of 1) problem, 2) reaction and 3) solution, a draconian formula used by deep state to manufacture increased authoritarian control over the US populace, Paul Wellstone’s death can easily be explained.
More than any other single member of Congress, the Minnesota senator posed a serious threat as the major opposition leader standing in the way of war criminals Bush and Cheney’s Iraq invasion as well as their formation of the Department of Homeland Security, two preplanned agendas rooted in the neocon think tank the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). Prior to their stealing the 2000 election and their PNAC’s “Pearl Harbor” event they created called 9/11, their regime had already called for attacking Iraq for regime change and erection of the DHS cancer. The Bush-Cheney reaction to their problem Paul Wellstone was to assassinate him making it appear as an accident.
By murder once Wellstone was out of the way, the neocons’ solution sent a loud and clear message of intimidation and a death threat in order to effectively silence any other potential Congressional opponents to the war in Iraq. Wellstone’s elimination paved the way for the war criminals’ successful campaign to win national support for the March 2003 US invasion of Iraq. That said, the month before the invasion on February 15th, 10-15 million people around the world in over 600 cities assembled in massive protest against the US intervention, the biggest one day antiwar demonstration in history. But unfortunately once the US military occupation began, the antiwar movement gradually fizzled out.
And the PNAC (members of PNAC project, image left) calling for regime change in seven sovereign nations including Iraq within five years was underway. The predatory rape and pillaging of Iraq as the world’s second largest oil producer was justified by lies of Saddam’s non-existent WMD’s and ties to terrorism. Sadly the neocons who are still at the helm wreaking havoc in 2016 were able to implement an enormous new Department of Homeland Security monstrosity masquerading as public “safeguard” against terrorism. So without Wellstone and virtually no further opposition in Congress, the neocons created their multibillion dollar security state apparatchik promoting and enforcing draconian counterterrorism laws leading to increasing centralized authoritarian government control that is ushering in their New World Order.
This tried and true Hegelian strategy has also been regularly utilized to further identify deep state obstacles as problems based on perceived neocons’ threats to US global unipolar hegemony.
American Empire’s relentless efforts to isolate, weaken and target for global war designated international enemies Russia, China and Iran through propagandized demonization and orchestrating fake crises illustrate yet more examples of the Hegelian Dialectic in action. And just as the US crime cabal was successful in eliminating Wellstone as their New World Order threat, for decades the crime cabal government has been planning its war against identified American dissenters as enemies of the state who object to its heavy-handed tyranny.
Paul Wellstone’s courageous opposition to the powerful Washington establishment’s evil cost him and his family’s life. Since we Americans are now in the same crosshairs of the same still entrenched shadow assassins, it’s time to make their arrests for treason and mass murder prior to our own death and destruction.
Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at http://empireexposed.blogspot.co.id/ .
Source: Global Research | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3203 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Quashing worries that job growth is flagging, the government on Friday reported that employers increased payrolls by 287, 000 in June, an arresting surge that could reframe the economic debate just weeks before Republicans and Democrats gather for their conventions. The official unemployment rate did rise to 4. 9 percent, from 4. 7 percent, but that was largely because more Americans rejoined the work force. And average hourly earnings ticked up again, continuing a pattern of rising wages that brought the yearly gain to 2. 6 percent. “Wow, this one takes my breath away,†said Diane Swonk, an independent economist in Chicago. An unexpectedly grim employment report in May combined with Britain’s vote to leave the European Union had fanned wider concerns that the American economy was in danger of stalling. During its meeting last month, the Federal Reserve unanimously decided to postpone increasing the benchmark interest rate. But the latest Labor Department report, Ms. Swonk said, gives the Fed “a cushion†to consider a bump in rates later this year. Financial markets rallied on the announcement, with the Standard Poor’s index gaining 1. 5 percent to end the day just short of the record close it recorded last year. But the political response was relatively muted, in deference to the shootings of police officers in Dallas. Both presidential candidates canceled campaign events, and the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, tweeted that he had postponed a scheduled speech on economic opportunity. At the moment, though, the Democrats are best poised to take advantage of the positive employment news. Lynn Vavreck, a professor of political science at University of California, Los Angeles, said that when it came to presidential elections, the economic trend was more important than any particular number. “As long as it’s going in the right direction,†she said, “that’s a good sign for the incumbent party. †Concerns persist about the vitality of the economic recovery, which reached the point this month. And perhaps nothing highlights the reality that every monthly jobs report provides only a fleeting and incomplete picture more than the giddy swing between May’s revised gain of 11, 000 and June’s 287, 000. (A strike by more than 35, 000 Verizon workers had artificially held down May’s totals.) Still, Friday’s report, showing the largest single monthly job expansion since October 2015, helped whisk away some of the cloudiest forecasts. The average of monthly gains rose to 147, 000, after taking into account the Labor Department’s revised estimates that showed 6, 000 fewer jobs were created in April and May than previously reported. June’s figures will be subject to two more revisions. “This report should ease any fears that a persistent slowdown or recession is coming soon in the U. S.,†said Dean Maki, chief economist at Point72 Asset Management. “The service sector is where the real strength is, with 256, 000 hires. But the gains were widespread across sectors. †Mr. Maki pointed out that the vigorous report was in line with several other encouraging signs. New claims for unemployment benefits have stayed at levels. Consumer spending is strong. The manufacturing and service industry indexes have jumped. And the number of unfilled jobs, 5. 8 million in April, is at a record since the survey began. Hillary Clinton, the Democratic has emphasized the steady economic improvements during President Obama’s two terms and the steep decline in the jobless rate from the recession’s peak of 10 percent. While acknowledging the economy “isn’t yet where we want it to be,†Mrs. Clinton has argued that the United States is “stronger and better positioned than anyone in the world. †She has endorsed a higher minimum wage, expanded paid leave, more money for job training and a infrastructure plan. Many Americans, though, particularly those with fewer skills and less education, have yet to enjoy the recovery’s rewards. Their discontent with the economy has been repeatedly voiced by Mr. Trump, who has opposed what he calls “job killing†trade deals. He has promised to impose high tariffs as a way of reversing the decline in manufacturing jobs, and to deport immigrants. There are other weak spots. Republicans can point out that real median household income is lower than it was a decade ago. And a broader measure of unemployment that includes discouraged job seekers, as well as those who would prefer to work full time instead of part time, is still nearly twice the official jobless rate, despite ticking down to 9. 6 percent in June. The proportion of people employed or actively looking for work has also been dragging along at low levels, suggesting that more people would return to the work force if desirable jobs were available. Tom Perez, the labor secretary, conceded there was “still a lot of work to do. †Unemployment for for example, whose jobless rate is typically about twice that of white Americans, rose last month to 8. 6 percent from 8. 2 percent. But Mr. Perez said that the job growth across sectors showed that the economy was resilient. Though the jobless rate, which is based on a separate survey of households, rose in June, it “went up for a good reason,’’ Mr. Perez said. ‘‘We’ve got more people looking for work and the work force. †The tighter labor market is nudging up wages. David Lukes, chief executive of Equity One, a commercial real estate investment company, is one of several employers who said they had increased salaries and benefits to retain current staff members and attract new ones. “I’ve had the troubling experience of losing good employees,†said Mr. Lukes, who has offered perks like flexible hours and stock incentives to keep the competition at bay. “Reward programs are much more important than they were three, four and five years ago. †He said that for the kind of workers he was looking for — administrators, sales representatives, accountants, paralegals, construction managers — the labor pool is not that deep. Given that the jobless rate has consistently been at 5 percent or lower since last fall, several economists argue it is time to adjust the benchmarks for what is labeled a strong or weak report. “There’s no question that job growth is significantly slower today than it was one or two years ago,†when the average monthly gain routinely topped 200, 000, Andrew Chamberlain, chief economist at Glassdoor Economic Research said. “But that is to be expected at this point in the economic cycle. †Taking account of the growing numbers of retiring baby boomers and the population growth, a monthly gain of 75, 000 to 100, 000 jobs is sufficient to keep the unemployment rate steady, Mr. Maki at Point72 Asset Management said. Ian Siegel, and chief executive of ZipRecruiter, which aggregates job postings and distributes them to job seekers, said that demand was down from the peaks of 2015, but hiring was still strong in health care and warehousing. Skilled workers in particular have more employment options. “I travel all over the country and everywhere I go, I sit down with C. E. O.s and ask them what their No. 1 problem is,†Steve Rick, chief economist at CUNA Mutual Group, which provides insurance and financial services for credit unions nationwide, said. “They say, ‘Just finding qualified people, from a teller to a mortgage home officer. ’†| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3204 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Share This: Dispatches from Eric Zuesse World War III — the first (and final) nuclear war — has never been so likely as it is now. Crossposted at strategic-culture.org PHOTO ABOVE: George H.W. Bush: Because of this man’s duplicity and the malignancy of his breed the world could end up in a heap of radioactive ashes. This plutocrat—along with his ilk— is a traitor to the human race. Here is the reason why we are currently even closer to a civilization-ending nuclear war than was the case during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962: During the Cold War, the two sides agreed that any war between the capitalist side and the communist side would escalate to nuclear war between the U.S. and the USSR and constitute Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.). Therefore, because of this mutual acceptance of M.A.D., hot war didn’t develop during that entire period, from 1945 till the Soviet Union dissolved and ended its military alliance the Warsaw Pact, both of which ended in 1991.
Throughout that 45-year period, called “the Cold War,” there was no hot war between the two nuclear superpowers, because both sides believed that any hot war would end in M.A.D. — mutual annihilation, and the end of civilization. It would end that way because any hot war between the two sides would terminate either in one side surrendering to the other, or else in at least one of the two sides (presumably to be started by the one that’s on the brink of defeat in the traditional hot war) nuclear-attacking the other (as being its only alternative to defeat). In other words, M.A.D. recognized and accepted the fact that for a nuclear power to attack a nuclear power with non-nuclear weaponry will almost certainly provoke a nuclear war at the moment when one of the two is losing (or about to lose) the conventional conflict to the other. Nuclear weapons are weapons of last resort, but they exist in order to prevent defeat. That’s what they exist for. If Japan had had deliverable nuclear weapons, then the end of World War II would have been considerably delayed. Japan would have lost because it had no allies, but the end of WW II would have been very different than it was. Only M.A.D. avoided the Cold War becoming a hot war.
B ut M.A.D. is not just a physical reality but equally importantly a mutually-shared belief-system , a belief-system that becomes no longer operative if one of the two sides switches to believe that a way exists actually to win a nuclear war — in other words, to believe that conquest of a nuclear power by another nuclear power is a real possibility. During the years prior to 2006, there was an increasing though unspoken belief at the top of the U.S. aristocracy (the people who control the U.S. government — or at least have controlled it since 1981 ), that the United States would be able to win a nuclear war against Russia; and, suddenly, in 2006, the belief was published, and virtually no one who possessed power or influence challenged it; and, from that time forward, M.A.D. was ended on the American side, and nuclear weapons became, in the U.S., strategized within a new framework (called “nuclear primacy” ) — the framework of nuclear weapons as constituting the ultimate weapons of conquest by the U.S. government. A fter 1991, when the Warsaw Pact no longer existed, the U.S. military alliance NATO invited into its membership all of the former states of the USSR except Russia (thereby indicating NATO’s continuing hostility toward that particular nation and the fraudulence of NATO’s peace with it), and also invited in all of the USSR’s former Warsaw Pact allies, and so NATO (a now clearly anti-Russian, no longer at all anti-communist, alliance) has come to extend right up to Russia’s own borders — something that the U.S. had refused to allow the USSR to do to the U.S. in 1962, when the Soviet leader Khrushchev wanted to place nuclear missiles in Cuba just 90 miles from America’s border.
I n the new era during which the U.S. government and its allies believe that nuclear primacy is about to be achieved, the framework in which the use of ‘nuclear primacy’ would be ‘justified’ is that, as soon as such ‘primacy’ is believed to have been obtained (such as by means of anti-ballistic missiles having been installed that would supposedly annihilate Russia’s nuclear arsenal before their warheads could even be released to retaliate against the U.S.-and-allied nuclear invasion), the U.S. side’s ‘defensive’ traditional-weapons invasion of Russia is being defeated by the Russians, and so the only way available to prevent the defeat of the U.S.-and-allied forces is by the use of nuclear weapons (the ‘taking-advantage’ of America’s ‘nuclear primacy’). That’s how the nuclear attack would be ’justified’, as a ‘necessary defensive response’ against Russia.
C onsequently, in the current U.S.-NATO operation on and near Russia’s borders , the Alliance is starting the buildup of its traditional invasion forces. This includes even some U.S. allies that aren’t in NATO . The supposed ‘justification’ for this amassing of invasion-forces on Russia’s borders is to ‘defend’ against ‘Russia’s aggression’ when (in March 2014 just weeks after the bloody U.S. coup in Ukraine ) Russia enabled the residents of Crimea to rejoin Crimea as part of Russia, of which Crimea had been until the Soviet dictator Khrushchev arbitrarily transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 . That disagreement (entirely hypocritical on the US/NATO side) about Crimea is the supposed root-cause for NATO’s involvement, even though Ukraine still isn’t (and previously didn’t want to be) a member of the NATO alliance. Anyway: this is the rationalization for NATO’s buildup toward what could become WW III. The cult film On the Beach (1959) addressed the issue of a terminal nuclear war between the USA and the Soviets. Hollywood at least had some semi-worthwhile artists working to alert humanity to the expanding insanity. Today the main fare is chauvinist vehicles and rank childish escapism.
Ever since 19 February 2016, the U.S. has been storing tanks and artillery , sufficient “to support 15,000 Marines” in undisclosed “confidential” Norwegian caves. Norway has a 200-mile border with Russia. CNN’s news-report on that was accompanied by a video headlined “Russia Reveals Aggressive Military Plans” . It reported that Russia’s (democratically elected, though not mentioned as such) President, Vladimir Putin, was moving troops and weapons toward Norway’s border. (How would the U.S. respond if Russia were to be storing invasion-equipment and troops in Mexico near the U.S. border? Would the U.S. be moving troops and weapons near the Mexican border to protect against an invasion of America; and, if so, then how accurate would it be if Russia’s media then headlined “America Reveals Aggressive Military Plans”? Hitler’s Germany used those sorts of media-tactics, but this time Obama’s America is doing that.) Marine Corps Times headlined on October 24th, “More than 300 Marines heading to Norway in January” . … U.S. President Barack Obama means business: he’s getting things set up for Hillary Clinton to finish as his successor. This kind of boldness exceeds anything during the Cold War. … America, and its greatly expanded NATO, thus now surrounds Russia not just with its tanks etc., but with its missiles and bombers, on and near Russia’s borders, and so the flight-time from launch to the nuclear-bombing (if the ground-invasion of Russia encounters defeat) will be less than ten minutes, sometimes even less than the time for Russia to get its own missiles launched in retaliation against ours; and so a U.S. blitz nuclear attack against Russia could conceivably be an entirely one-sided war. Here is how that scenario — the end of physical M.A.D. — has actually become the objective sought by the U.S. government (and the necessary backstory for America’s war-drills on Russia’s borders): SANCTIMONIOUS EXCEPTIONALISM STRIKES AGAIN— Obviously the assumption is that the world has to trust America’s “inherent goodness” in its use of nuclear supremacy… In 2006, the U.S. aristocracy published in the journal Foreign Affairs, from their Council on Foreign Relations, the first article which said that the U.S. goal should no longer be a continuation of M.A.D., but instead “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy” , by which the U.S. aristocracy meant the rise of America’s ability to win a nuclear war against Russia. It established this stunning goal merely by saying that such an objective could be achieved and that it should be achieved, and by the article’s being published by the U.S. aristocracy itself (the people who control this country), and by furthermore the U.S. aristocracy not condemning and rejecting and repudiating it but simply letting that article stand with little to no public discussion (and no public debate) about it, much less with the chorus of public condemnations of it in the U.S. press, such as would have happened if America were a democracy — but this nation no longer is a democracy, it has become an aristocracy , and this aristocracy had now published the “Nuclear Primacy” article. (By contrast, in the obscure journal China Security was published in the Autumn 2006 issue the main critique against it, “The Fallacy of Nuclear Primacy” . That article had no impact.) The Foreign Affairs article even was so bold as to assert that “U.S. leaders have always aspired to this goal” (nuclear primacy) — a wild and unsupported allegation that’s not much different from alleging that not only George W. Bush but all U.S. Presidents after World War II were aspiring to have the ability to conquer Russia (and the authors were asserting that only now was this supposedly terrific ability coming within reach). It was explicit about G.W. Bush’s having this desire: “The intentional pursuit of nuclear primacy is, moreover, entirely consistent with the United States’ declared policy of expanding its global dominance. The Bush administration’s 2002 National Security Strategy explicitly states that the United States aims to establish military primacy.” That allegation was tragically true, which is one of the reasons why Bush (like his father, who actually started the determined policy to achieve nuclear primacy) was so dangerous and harmful a President. His invasion of Iraq was merely a symptom of that deeper disease. … And, so, this article about “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy” and “The End of” M.A.D., was now — since it was published by the CFR and not rejected by any influential group — accepted within the U.S. as a goal, “Nuclear Primacy,” which the U.S. government could and should strive for. That idea, of a winnable nuclear war (winnable by the U.S., of course), was no longer heretical, no longer viewed as repugnant. In fact, this article had been introduced and accepted by Harvard University simultaneously in its longer form and simultaneously published by their scholarly journal International Security , which is the leading (it’s the world’s most influential) scholarly journal dealing with that subject, and its title there was “The End of MAD?” . (The periods are customarily removed from the acronym “M.A.D.”, perhaps in order to associate the M.A.D. concept with the pejorative term, insanity. So — at least in the United States — the termination of M.A.D. has always had a favorable ring to it, even before that goal became effectively U.S. policy, which it has been at least ever since 2006.) And no one was saying that Harvard and its journal and the CFR were the ones who were at all “mad” or anything similar, such as “insane.”
The aristocracy’s stamp of approval upon the concept of nuclear primacy was clear, from at least 2006 on. Although M.A.D. continued as regards Russia’s side, it no longer remained operative thinking on America’s side. That’s now clear, and this is Russia’s predicament — and the world’s (because a nuclear war involving even just one of the two nuclear superpowers would destroy the world ). …
U.S. President Barack Obama is putting the goal of nuclear primacy into place, starting with implementation of Ronald Reagan’s proposed “Star Wars” Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defense system, now called the Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, and technically called by the name of its current embodiment: Lockheed Martin’s, Boeing’s, and Raytheon’s, Aegis Ashore system, which Obama first made operational in Romania on 12 May 2016 . It’s designed so as to enable a surprise nuclear attack against Russia in which any missiles that Russia might be able to launch in retaliation will supposedly (if the system works 100%) be annihilated during their launch-phase. Officially , however, its purpose is to defend Europe from being attacked by Iranian missiles. Any public U.S. admission that this ‘defensive’ system is actually preparation for a blitz U.S. nuclear assault on Russia is obviously out of the question. And, obviously, Russians know that Obama is lying and that this is preparation by the U.S. for a blitz nuclear attack against Russia. The West’s ‘news’ media might be such ‘fools’ as not to be aware of that fact, but Putin has made quite clear that he is not, and he is preparing Russia to deal with it. O bama’s action here was made possible by U.S. President George W. Bush’s 2002 unilateral termination of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty with Russia’s predecessor, the Soviet Union. Bush rushed forward with Reagan’s “Star Wars” program even despite there having been no successful tests of the necessary technology: the existing technology consistently failed but Bush decided to invest $53 billion of U.S. taxpayers’ money in it . Bush in 2004 received British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s participation and provisioning of locations and facilities to implement the plan , and Bush was also pressing both Poland and the Czech Republic to allow the U.S. to position ABMs there . Obama came into office criticizing the ABM plan and pretending not to be hostile toward Russia. He deceived Vladimir Putin into thinking that Obama sincerely wanted to pursue peace and cooperation with Russia. As soon as Obama became re-elected, his verbal smiling teeth immediately became actual glaring fangs. Then, soon after his regime overthrew in a bloody February 2014 coup the Moscow-friendly democratically elected President of Ukraine, bordering Russia , Russia started in the summer of 2014 to ignore the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, because for Washington the next step (beyond Ukraine) clearly now would be Moscow and so all bets were off. The installation of the Aegis Ashore in Romania likewise violates that Treaty , which is one important reason why Obama lies to say that all of the Aegis Ashore facilities will be targeted against Iran — and maybe also North Korea — but never against Russia. … The full Aegis Ashore system, which will require several such sites, isn’t yet operational. NATO’s PR-arm the Atlantic Council, has mentioned among the Aegis Ashore’s benefits, that for the next such site, in Poland, “Poland announced in late April that it would buy eight Patriot missile batteries from Virginia-based Raytheon Co. in a deal that could generate at least $2.5 billion in US export content.” The U.S. government officials and their friends who have invested in Raytheon and the other ‘defense’ firms didn’t need to be informed of this by any PR person. They already knew of it from more reliable sources, and perhaps they even have invested in nuclear bunkers for themselves and their friends and their friends’ friends . Lots of money is changing hands during this build-up. … Also in 2006, later in that year, specifically on 18 November 2006, was published at Global Research, which is an independent Canadian online international site dealing with geostrategy, a superb summary of the connection that this plan has to America’s string of invasions in the Middle East. It’s titled “Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ‘New Middle East’,” by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, who explains: … It should be noted that in his book, “The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geo-strategic Imperatives,” Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former U.S. National Security Advisor, alluded to the modern Middle East as a control lever of an area he, Brzezinski, calls the Eurasian Balkans. The Eurasian Balkans consists of the Caucasus (Georgia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and Armenia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan) and to some extent both Iran and Turkey. Iran and Turkey both form the northernmost tiers of the Middle East (excluding the Caucasus4) that edge into Europe and the former Soviet Union. The Map of the “New Middle East”
A relatively unknown map of the Middle East, NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan, and Pakistan has been circulating around strategic, governmental, NATO, policy and military circles since mid-2006. It has been casually allowed to surface in public, maybe in an attempt to build consensus and to slowly prepare the general public for possible, maybe even cataclysmic, changes in the Middle East. This is a map of a redrawn and restructured Middle East identified as the “New Middle East.”
MAP OF THE NEW MIDDLE EAST Note: The following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006). Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has most probably been used at the National War Academy as well as in military planning circles. … Brzezinski’s advocacy of “American Primacy” fits perfectly with the aristocracy’s support of “Nuclear Primacy,” and appeared eight years before it. His 1998 book was seminal also in many other ways. And, as that Nazemroaya article made clear, Brzezinski’s plan was already being put into effect by the U.S. government, even before 2006. … However, the person who actually made the seminal decision behind all of this, the decision to conquer Russia, was U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush, on the night of 24 February 1990, just before the Soviet Union ended. He was the person who decided that after the USSR and its Warsaw Pact terminated, NATO would continue that cold war until Russia has been surrounded by U.S. allies, who are Russia’s enemies, when Russia will ultimately either surrender or else be destroyed by the U.S. and its friends. … Even if Russia assumes that any such nuclear war would be M.A.D., the government of the U.S. no longer does. That’s Russia’s predicament — and the world’s . … However, military planners in the U.S. and its vassal nations, do not include in their calculations the world: the impacts that such nuclear winter and all the rest will have if their dream of ‘nuclear primacy’ amounts to anything more than merely the vicious hoax that it is. This fact, of their ignoring the world, is scandalous — against our military planners. They are so obsessed with ‘victory’, that they are willing to participate in this false and potentially mega-catastrophic dream, of ‘nuclear primacy’. … Unless and until nuclear weapons are totally eliminated (which might never happen), their constructive function, of preventing WW III, must continue, not end as a result of ‘nuclear primacy’ and other such lies and delusions. However, the ‘news’ media, especially in ‘The West’, are not pointing out those lies and distortions, but instead reinforcing them. … If there is to be a WW III, it will end the world . That is the key fact, which is ignored by ‘The West’s’ military planners. [And the media prostitutes that serve the American empire’s criminal objectives.] … NATO needs to end now, just as the Warsaw Pact did in 1991 — when an indecent, oligarchic , ‘The West’ —continued the Cold War despite the Warsaw Pact’s end, and now is making it hot. About the author | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3205 | 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: Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, 'We Don't Serve Pigs' Claim summaries: A fabricated article claimed an "illegal alien" employed at McDonald's was fired for telling cops the chain doesn't "serve pigs."
contextual information: On 18 July 2016 the web site Conservative Daily Post published an article reporting that an "illegal alien" had been fired after she declined to serve police officers at an Alabama McDonald's, declaring that we dont serve pigs. article The outrage-provoking article was set against the backdrop of a month of tensions between police officers and community members in July 2016. The shooting deaths of civilians Alton Sterling and Philando Castile led to national protests, and police officers were killed in ambush shootings in Dallas and Baton Rouge. Alton Sterling Philando Castile Dallas Baton Rouge In that period, several rumors of police officers "shunned" or mistreated at restaurants circulated online. A group of policemen in Pennsylvania said they paid the bill of a couple who refused to sit near them, a sheriff in Washington reported that a Chinese restaurant's owners had said law enforcement was not welcome there, and officers in Baton Rouge maintained that a server at Las Palmas restaurant had put mucus in their drinks. Pennsylvania reported Las Palmas After those claims became virally popular, Conservative Daily Post asserted: Its pretty sad to look around and see how police officers are being treated right now. They put their lives on the line every single day to defend our freedoms within the local community. We are more than thankful for our military, yet we fail to recognize the very people that keep us safe in our homes at night. Police officers dont get paid a lot either. They knowingly walk into possible gunfights almost every day. They do it because they heard the call to serve. They do it because they are true American patriots. Well, there was just another case of disrespect against cops. In Alabama, last week a cashier decided that she didnt want to serve the cops. Maria Englesia pictured above told the officers to get out of here because they didnt serve pigs. This was blatant. McDonalds stepped in as soon as they heard what happened. They immediately fired the woman and issued a formal apology to the police department of Alabama. Social media users accepted that report at face value: @McDonalds #Illegal Alien Denied Cops Service, We Dont Serve Pigs https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds @McDonalds #Illegal https://t.co/5n3esRSePy #BoycottMcDonalds Jan Johnson (@JanJohnsonFL) July 18, 2016 July 18, 2016 Illegal Alien McDonald's clerk tells police: "We don't serve your kind" Get the fuck out of my country, you bitch!! https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow obamasucksballs (@obamasucksballs) July 19, 2016 https://t.co/3HGU4ml3ow July 19, 2016 Conservative Daily Post claimed McDonald's had fired the employee and apologized, but no mention of any such controversy (by the company or by commenters) was visible on the hamburger chain's Twitter account, nor on McDonald's Facebook page save for one cryptic comment: Twitter Aside from the single comment, no one appeared to be asking about any incidents involving a Maria Englesia in Alabama. Had the story been genuine, it would have generated news coverage from other outlets. Conservative Daily Post's article also waved another very large red flag: The image doesn't depict a "Maria Englesia" or anyone else recently fired from any McDonald's, anywhere, for any reason. It's a stock photograph dating to at least 2012: Conservative Daily News doesn't carry any sort of warning or disclaimer advising readers about hosting fabricated content, but this story was clearly untrue. No public apology was tendered by McDonald's over an employee's purported refusal to serve Alabama cops, no news outlets or blogs reported on the incident, and the image of the woman "pictured above" was a stock photograph swiped from Getty. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3206 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: by Yves Smith
Yves here. This article is a sad vignette of how severely central bankers and many economic commentators, in this case one at Westpac, are locked into destructive orthodox thinking. The ECB’s unconventional monetary policy experiment has been an abject failure. And the reason should be obvious: businesses don’t borrow to expand just because money has gone on sale. They borrow to expand if they see an opportunity and if the cost of funding does not constrain the growth plan. The parties most likely to borrow just because money is cheap are the last ones you want to do that: financial speculators, since the cost of money is one of their biggest costs and zombie businesses, since they will borrow if they can to keep an otherwise failed venture going.
Notice also that Westpac, presumably following the ECB, views more consumer demand for credit as a good thing. Since more and more economic studies have found that borrowing by households is economically unproductive beyond a modest level, policymakers need to get over the wrongheaded idea that they should promote growth in consumer credit.
It is also bizarre to see what central bankers have rationalized or ignored in order to persist in increasingly counterproductive monetary experiments. For instance, super low interest rates drain demand by reducing incomes of savers and retirees. Yet the monetary authorities told themselves that pensioners would choose to spend their capital to maintain their lifestyles. That’s not what has happened. They’ve cut spending and even tried increasing saving to make up for lost returns. For the most part, the ones who have eaten into their nest eggs had no choice. Similarly, super low interest rates signal a lack of official confidence about the economy, and unprecedented monetary experiments are very disconcerting to many businessmen. If the officialdom is signaling deflationary risk, the rational response is to save, since goods and services will be cheaper later.
By David Llewellyn-Smith, founding publisher and former editor-in-chief of The Diplomat magazine, now the Asia Pacific’s leading geo-politics website. Originally posted at MacroBusiness
From Westpac’s Elliot Clarke
A key purpose behind the ECB’s alternative easing programs has been to materially improve credit provision and conditions in the Euro Area economy. Exhibiting a lagged relationship with the business cycle and further hampered by the health of European banks, success on this front has been slow and limited.
As referenced in their most recent policy statement, “loan dynamics followed the path of gradual recovery observed since the beginning of 2014”. However, that has only left annual growth in loans to non-financial corporates and households at 1.9%yr and 1.8%yr respectively at September 2016.
These are hardly strong outcomes and, of late, there has been a clear lack of momentum, meaning further material gains are unlikely for the forseeable future. Indeed, from the detail of the ECB’s own bank lending survey, there is evidence to suggest credit growth is set to slow.
Starting with non-financial corporates, the ECB survey reports that there is a clear downtrend in current credit demand, with the net per cent of respondents reporting increased demand for credit from firms having peaked in the first quarter of 2016 and consistently declined ever since.
Expectations of future growth in non-financial corporate loan demand is also in a clear downtrend. Importantly, the peak in the expected series came in mid-2015 (six months ahead of the actual series’ peak) and has endured. It should be noted though that the expected series peaked at a high level and is still consistent with positive credit growth – so we are not anticipating an outright contraction in new lending.
The purpose for new loans for corporates also remains unhelpful to the growth outlook for the real economy. Having improved from mid-2015 to early 2016, the six months to October saw demand for credit to fund fixed asset investment abate.
Ergo, after a prolonged contraction to mid-2015, it seems a recovery in real investment has failed to launch. This is partly attributable to a lack of confidence in the outlook. But it has also come as a result of loan conditions for firms remaining tight. The ECB’s survey suggests conditions have only improved incrementally since mid-2014.
The above results imply only limited support to job creation and therefore to household incomes. It is unsurprising then that growth in credit to households also looks to be peaking at a fairly modest pace relative to history.
As for non-financial corporates, households in the Euro Area are clearly benefitting from lower interest rates. Yet the overall credit conditions they are currently experiencing are little changed from a year ago, or indeed late-2013. Note that since end-2013, the average percentage of banks reporting an easing in standards for mortgages and consumer credit has been 2% and 3% respectively. In the three years prior, an average of 14% and 6% of respondents reported tighter conditions each quarter.
The above analysis does not, of itself, justify the ECB continuing its asset purchases well beyond March 2017 – there are many market and political points that also need to be considered. But it does suggest that credit provision in the Euro Area is not yet self sustaining. Without the ECB’s support, the Euro Area’s economy; banks; and financial markets will be left in a fragile state, susceptible to any and all economic or financial shocks.
Add the political strife building across the Continent that is threatening further eurozone fracturing with the Italian referendum in December, Netherlands election in March, French election April-May, German election in September then Italy six months later and there is no way that the ECB can allow economic weakness and/or peripheral funding stress to creep back in.
It is going to print until the cows come home. 0 0 0 0 0 0 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3207 | 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 Cargo Ship 'Draw' a Penis Before Getting Stuck in Suez Canal? Claim summaries: Some may classify getting stuck in the Suez Canal as a dick move.
contextual information: On March 23, 2021, shipping traffic through Egypt's Suez Canal was grounded to a halt after a large vessel called the "Ever Given" got stuck in the passageway. Shortly after news broke about this blocked shipping route, an image started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed how the Ever Given, a nearly 200-foot wide, 224,000-ton vessel, had "drawn" a penis in its route movements shortly before it entered the Suez Canal: This is a genuine image showing the Ever Given's route before it got stuck in the Suez Canal. While it may resemble a rough drawing of a penis, there's no evidence to indicate that this was "drawn" on purpose. The image comes from a video created by the vessel-trafficking service provider VesselFinder.com. The video shows the movements of the Ever Given as it waited for its turn to enter the Suez Canal. Vessel Finder wrote: VesselFinder.com On the occasion of the disputed incident of the ultra-large container ship Ever Given blocking the Suez Canal, the VesselFinder team made a video simulation of the movements of the ship in more detail, for some time before it got stuck in the canal and blocked the main artery of cargo flow between Asia and Europe. Here's the video: While some social media users may have been skeptical of this image, thinking that it was just a crude joke, a spokesperson for Vesselfinder.com confirmed to Vice that the route was genuine, adding that "there is no room for some kind of conspiracies or false data." Vice Another map from the ship-tracking website Myshiptracking.com also shows the Ever Given's seemingly NSFW route. map Myshiptracking.com CNN reported on March 24 that eight tugboats were working to free the vessel, but that it could be days before the Suez Canal, one of the world's busiest shipping routes, returns to normal traffic levels: reported Eight tug boats are working to free a large container ship stuck in Egypt's Suez Canal, halting marine traffic through one of the busiest and most important waterways in the world. The rescue boats are working to float and release the Ever Given, a 59-meter-wide (193.5-feet) vessel that ran aground after 40-knot winds and a sandstorm caused low visibility and poor navigation, the Suez Canal Authority said in a statement Wednesday. The 224,000-ton vessel, sailing under a Panama flag, was en route to the port of Rotterdam in the Netherlands when it was knocked off course. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3208 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 21st Century Wire says The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, had his first phone meeting with President Donald Trump after his inauguration in January and now it looks like the ground work is being laid for the first face to face meeting with Trump in person, perhaps in Slovenia.There certainly is a lot to discuss between trade, economic issues, security and of course terrorism. Putin noted, By joining our efforts, we could make a considerable contribution to settling these issues, including fighting international terrorism RT explores this report further in the below article. RT Ljubljana and Slovenia in general is of course a great place to hold such dialogue, Putin said on Friday.Putin, who is currently welcoming Slovenian President Borut Pahor in Russia on an official visit, thanked his guest for his eagerness to host such a meeting, but said that the choice of venue did not depend on Moscow alone. If this meeting takes place someday, we have nothing against Ljubljana [as the venue], Putin said at a press conference. He reminded that he also met with former US President Barack Obama in the Slovenian capital.READ MORE: Lavrov: Undoing Obama-inflicted damage to Russia-US ties will take great effortThe Russian and the new American presidents had their first phone conversation after Trump s inauguration in January. Yet, after Trump was sworn into presidency, Kremlin said it would take months rather than weeks to organize a meeting between the two leaders. It won t happen in a matter of weeks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in an interview with the BBC, adding the meeting could hopefully happen in the months to come. Relations between Moscow and Washington have deteriorated badly over the past five years, the Russian president said on Friday. They require recovery in the interests of both the Russian and American people, Putin added, saying that Moscow has always welcomed mending ties with the US. We have always welcomed and count on restoring our relations to the full scale and in all directions, but it depends not only on us, but also on the American side, Putin said.READ MORE: Trump confronting rabid Russophobia found in DNA of Republican Party The new US president needs to finish forming his team, which will decide on who will participate in the dialogues, the Russian president told the media. Trade, economic, and security issues are to be among the topics discussed, including the regions in the world suffering from numerous conflicts, he said.'I don t know #Putin, but if we can get along with Russia that s a great thing' #Trump https://t.co/6WmvIJcSQk pic.twitter.com/2OAohTJzxR RT (@RT_com) January 27, 2017 By joining our efforts, we could make a considerable contribution to settling these issues Continue this report at RTREAD MORE TRUMP NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Trump FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3209 | 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 Bell Peppers Have Genders? Claim summaries: Bell peppers come in a variety of sizes and colors, and according to a popular internet rumor, a variety of genders as well.
contextual information: Bell peppers come in a variety of sizes and colors, and, according to a popular internet rumor, a variety of genders as well: This old cook's tale about identifying the gender of bell peppers has been around for years, but it has recently seen an uptick in Internet interest on social media sites such as Pinterest. But no matter how many times the above-displayed image is shared, it will not change the fact that a bell pepper's sex cannot be determined by the number of bumps on its outer surface in large part because peppers aren't classifiable as being wholly one sex or the other: Pinterest A section on the reproductive biology of peppers in The Encyclopedia of Fruit and Nuts notes that bell peppers come from flowers possessing both male and female sex organs: "Pepper flowers are complete and perfect, that is they have a calyx, corolla and male and female sex organs. The flowers are protogynous, but readily self-pollinate." notes David Karp, a pomologist at UC Riverside, also addressed the rumor of bell pepper gender in 2013: "The supposition that there are male and female peppers is a common canard, but untrue. Peppers grow from flowers that have both male and female parts. The fruits do not have a gender." addressed While bell peppers are neither male nor female, some food blogs have insisted there is still some usefulness to this widespread rumor. For example, the Garden Frugal writes that while it is not scientifically accurate to label bell peppers male or female, assigning a gender may help cooks remember how to choose the right peppers: writes Describing peppers as a gender is not accurate, because bell peppers are hermaphroditic. The gender reference is used only as a memory aid to help select the best bell pepper for each purpose either eating raw, seed collection, or for cooking. There is a simple method for identifying which bell pepper has the traits you desire. Peppers with four lobes are female and those with three lobes are male. The female peppers with more lobes, contain more seeds are best for seed collecting and growing new plants (hence female). They are also sweeter when eaten raw. The male peppers with three or fewer lobes are better for grilling, cooking. They also contain fewer seeds. But this claim is also unfounded, as the number of lobes on a pepper does not have any bearing on its taste. And while it could be argued a four-lobed pepper has more seeds than a three-lobed pepper, this has more to do with the overall size of the fruit than the number of lobes. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3210 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Chinese government has continued to protest the Trump administration’s repeated assurances it would oppose China’s ongoing colonization of international waters in the South China Sea, most recently challenging White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer for calling the waters in question “international territory. â€[“I don’t think he [Spicer] is in a position to say that that’s international territory,†Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang told NBC News in an interview. “There might be difference, or controversial claims over the sovereignty of those islands, but that’s not for the United States. That might be between China and some other countries in this region. †Lu’s remarks on bilateral relations with the United States were significantly sharper in tone than those of his boss, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who said in recent remarks that Beijing’s Communist Party would like to “increase mutual trust, focus cooperation, manage and control disputes and promote the healthy development of relations, to bring even greater benefits to both peoples. †Spicer had said during his regular press briefing on Monday that the United States would play a role in protecting the territorial integrity of the South China Sea. “If those islands are, in fact, in international waters and not part of China proper, yeah, we’ll make sure we defend international interests from being taken over by one country. †Spicer’s comments appeared to irritate Chinese officials still objecting to remarks by incoming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson about the region. In a Senate hearing otherwise largely devoid of definitive answers on major international disputes, Tillerson vowed to play a role in protecting the interests of nations whose land and sea China claimed as its own in the region. “We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed,†he told a Senate committee, comparing China’s usurpation of South China Sea territory to Russia’s invasion and colonization of Crimea. China claims the territory within a border Beijing refers to as the “ line. †Within that line is territory belonging to the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Brunei, and Malaysia, as well as some waters close to Natuna Island, Indonesia. China has constructed numerous artificial islands in the Spratly and Paracel Islands and the Scarborough Shoal, challenging the sovereignty of the Philippines and Vietnam. China has filled some of those islands with military assets, which the United States has repeatedly protested as threat to the international community. China’s official party line on the region appears to be that only the United States continues to protest their presence in waters not belonging to sovereign China. “Countries have already come back to the original agreement that maybe for the time being we could set aside those sovereign disputes, and focus on some joint developments, and working together to maintain the peace and stability in this region,†Lu told NBC. Lu appeared to mostly be referring to the Philippines, which won a case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague over China’s illegal construction, but has since backed down of its objection to China’s territorial pursuits under President Rodrigo Duterte. His predecessor, Benigno Aquino, was the one to bring the case to the Hague. While the Trump administration appears to be making the liberation of the colonized South China Sea a priority, President Barack Obama had also engaged China on the matter. Former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter attended military exercises in the region and often repeated the U. S. policy of having the American military “fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows. †The Defense Department also staged numerous “freedom of navigation†exercises in the region, much to China’s chagrin. Critics argue, however, that the Obama administration’s guest passages through the South China Sea did not actively challenge China’s adverse possession claims on the artificial islands and, as such, were more of a “PR stunt†than effective deterrence. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3211 | 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 ICE 'Citizens Academy' Training Civilians To Arrest 'Undocumented' Immigrants? Claim summaries: An ICE initiative in Chicago aims to "debunk myths" about the agency known for its detention centers and targeting of immigrant communities.
contextual information: As so-called undocumented immigrants in the U.S. struggled to avoid deportation and risked their health during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, government agencies created potential new challenges for them. In July, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) department announced they would be offering a six-day Citizens Academy training starting in September in Chicago, which would allow civilians and ICE officers to engage with each other. struggled risked their health announced Snopes readers shared the following letter from ICE, reportedly sent to potential participants across Chicago, and asked us if it meant the agency would be training civilians to assist in the apprehension of undocumented people. The answer is complicated. letter We found that this was an actual letter sent by ICE. Although they said they were planning to conduct trainings in September and would show civilians how they made arrests, the notion that this would lead to civilians actually apprehending undocumented people was disputed by the agency. Immigration advocates, however, were skeptical. In order to understand the actual nature and likely outcome of these trainings, we reached out to ICE, as well as immigration advocates, and looked at past examples of such academies. According to an ICE press release, the interactive program would occur once a week over six weeks. Participants would learn about ICE policies and procedures from ERO officers, while officers would hear participants perspectives and debunk myths about ICE. press release The curriculum will include, but is not limited to, classroom instruction, visiting an immigration detention center, learning more about the health care ICE provides to those in its custody, and examining ICEs role in ensuring dignity, respect and due process of an immigration case from start to finish. Many in Chicago received letters from ICE inviting them to apply. The letter said, attendees will participate in scenario-based training ... including, but not limited to defensive tactics, firearms familiarization, and targeted arrests. received Nicole Alberico, an ICE spokesperson, responded to Snopes' request for more information about the training (emphasis ours): ...the academy is not to train members of the public to do the work of trained, federal law enforcement officers. ICE ERO Citizens Academy is modeled after other law enforcement community outreach programs including ICEs Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), FBI and local police departments all with the goal of directly engaging and educating the public. Chicago ERO is looking for a diverse set of influential community leaders regardless of their stance on ICE to apply. The spokesperson said that they also had not determined whether media would be permitted to attend the training, as they were considering health precautions because of the pandemic and privacy concerns. In sum, according to their own descriptions, ICE plans on showing civilians how they as an agency carry out arrests but will not be training civilians to do arrests themselves. According to one report, such a Citizens Academy has already taken place in Los Angeles for years, with participants simulating drug busts, arrests, and stakeouts. According to one graduate, the course immersed people in what the agents do. While the Chicago program was to be run by ERO, the Los Angeles Academy was being run under ICEs Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) department. one report simulating The goal of such training appeared to be to get more people to understand ICEs perspective, see how they operate, and eventually construct a positive image of the agency in various communities. There is no available evidence that such trainings led to civilians participating in actual arrests. Testimony from activists, human rights organizations, and reporting show ample proof of ICEs history of violating detainees rights, inhumane arrests of undocumented immigrants, separating children from their parents, and the lack of accountability surrounding their operations. ICE has also used civilian informants before. violating detainees rights arrests lack of accountability civilian informants The Citizens Academy announcement faced swift backlash from activists and government officials, including Chicago's alderman, Rossana Rodriguez, who labeled it a vigilante academy. In July, Democratic Rep. Mike Quigley put forward an amendment to the Homeland Security spending bill, barring agencies like ICE from using government funds to run Citizens Academy courses. vigilante academy forward Immigration activists said these classes were at best propaganda and at worst would train civilians to "snitch" on undocumented immigrants. Lam Nguyen Ho, executive director of Beyond Legal Aid, an organization that provides legal services to immigrants in Chicago, spoke to Snopes about the dangers of such academies: said propaganda ... the best case scenario for this training is ICE doing a marketing campaign to justify continuing to deport undocumented immigrants indiscriminately and separating families inhumanely ... We have immigrants afraid of opening their doors and applying for immigration rights to which they are actually eligible due to the fears and violence they see ... I cant imagine the misinformation and fears that will be created when an agency of our government is basically sanctioning and coordinating neighbors surveilling, profiling, or worse against each other. (Update: The Chicago Citizen's Academy was postponed in 2020 due to the pandemic, and a new date had not been announced. According to a statement from an ICE official, it will be tentatively scheduled for the spring of 2021.) In sum, ICE confirmed that the Citizens Academy course will take place, but denied they will train civilians to carry out arrests. Based on ICEs history of abuses against immigrant populations, the fears surrounding this particular training aren't unreasonable, but the exact nature and outcome of the training remains to be seen. Based on all of the above factors, we rate this claim a Mixture. Da Silva, Chantal. "DHS Spending Bill Amended to Ban Funding for ICE's Citizen's Academy."
Newsweek. 15 July 2020. Da Silva, Chantal. "ICE Offering 'Citizens Academy' Course with Training on Arresting Immigrants."
Newsweek. 9 July 2020. Gonzalez, Christina."ICE Citizen Academy Causing Uproar in Chicago, Has Been Going on in Los Angeles - for Years."
Fox11 Los Angeles. 11 July 2020. Human Rights Watch. "US: Stop Using Untrained, Abusive Agencies at Protests."
5 June 2020. Kaplan, Emily. "What Isolation Does to Undocumented Immigrants."
The Atlantic. 27 May 2020. Katz, Ryan. "Play to Stay."
The Intercept. 24 September 2018. McFarling, Usha Lee. "Fearing Deportation, Many Immigrants at Higher Risk of Covid-19 Are Afraid to Seek Testing or Care."
StatNews. 15 April 2020. Mejia, Brittny. "At Citizen Academies, Devoted Participants Get Their Law Enforcement Fix."
Los Angeles Times. 3 December 2018. Tashman, Brian. "Congress Needs To Hold ICE Accountable for Abuses."
ACLU. 2 February 2018. Torres, Adry. "ICE Is Offering a Six-week Course on How to Arrest Immigrants - Including 'Firearms and Defensive Training' - as Critics Warns They Are Using Private Citizens As Their Eyes and Ears."
The Daily Mail.8 July 2020. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "ICE Offers First Citizens Academy for Public to Learn More About Agencys Mission in Chicago."
13 July 2020. Zamudio, Maria Ines. "ICE Citizens Trainings May Be a 'Vigilante Academy,' Chicago Alderman Warns."
NPR. 10 July 2020. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3212 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Is there a photo depicting Ice Cube and 50 Cent wearing hats that support Trump? Claim summaries: A manipulated image was just a lil bit misleading.
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 Oct. 20, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump's son Eric Trump posted an image to social media that supposedly showed musicians Ice Cube and Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson wearing "Trump 2020" hats. This is not a genuine photograph of 50 Cent and Ice Cube wearing "Trump 2020" hats; it is a doctored image created from a photograph of Ice Cube and 50 Cent at a BIG3 basketball game in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2017. In the original image, Ice Cube is wearing a hat with the BIG3 logo, while 50 Cent is wearing a hat with a New York Yankees logo. Ice Cube shared the original photograph on his Twitter page in July 2020, along with a birthday message for his friend 50 Cent. Getty Images has archived a few other photographs taken at this event. The image at the top of this article, for example, carries the caption: "LAS VEGAS, NV - AUGUST 26: BIG3 founder and recording artist Ice Cube and Curtis '50 Cent' Jackson attend the BIG3 three-on-three basketball league championship game on August 26, 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/BIG3/Getty Images)." Ice Cube confirmed that the image was fake in a message posted to Twitter, and Trump has since deleted his tweet. Although this image is fake, both musicians have indeed aligned themselves, at least in part, with the Trump administration. While Ice Cube has not endorsed Trump for 2020, he did work with the president's administration to create a "Contract With Black America." Ice Cube stated that he would "advise anyone on the planet who has the power to help Black Americans close the enormous wealth gap." 50 Cent's support for Trump was more explicit. On Oct. 19, 50 Cent took to Instagram and shared a message endorsing Trump, along with a screenshot from CNBC's "Power Lunch" concerning a report that Biden's tax plan would raise the tax rate to as much as 62% on Americans who make more than $400,000 a year. This screenshot comes from a segment of "Power Lunch" that aired on Oct. 19. During this segment, CNBC's Robert Frank explained how people earning more than $400,000 a year could pay income taxes at a rate of more than 62%. Interestingly, Ice Cube and 50 Cent appear to be aligning themselves with Trump for polar opposite reasons. Ice Cube, for instance, said that he was willing to work with either presidential campaign in order to improve the lives of Black Americans and to "close the enormous wealth gap." 50 Cent, on the other hand, stated he didn't care that "Trump doesn't like Black people" and that he was endorsing the incumbent because his opponent's tax plan would increase taxes on wealthy Americans. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3213 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Congressional Budget Office s review of the Republicans replacement plan for the ACA is out, and it s not good news. Under the plan, 24 million people will lose their healthcare coverage by 2026. 14 million of those people will see their insurance ripped from them just in the next two years. In total, this plan will result in 52 million uninsured people in 2026. Over the next four years, premiums are expected to rise by as much as 20 percent more than they would under the ACA. Premiums might fall for younger people after 2020 but would continue to rise for older people.And on it goes.Paul Ryan, however, sees the report as a resounding endorsement of the plan because it will reduce the deficit by a whole $336 billion over a decade and is supposed to maybe lower premiums at some point in the future.CBO report confirms it American Health Care Act will lower premiums & improve access to quality, affordable care. https://t.co/jNzmYFPe9H pic.twitter.com/f0NGuLiztl Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 13, 2017And Twitter is throwing a livid fit with him for that tweet, as well they should. The GOP s first priority should be the uninsured and the risk of people becoming uninsured. Instead, they re worried about deficits and getting lower premiums at some point for some demographics. Twitter is being merciless in their evaluation of his response.@SpeakerRyan Delete your account. David Podhaskie (@davidpodhaskie) March 13, 2017.@SpeakerRyan it literally says 24 million will lose coverage pic.twitter.com/iDDTerO77X Jordan Uhl (@JordanUhl) March 13, 2017.@SpeakerRyan ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? TALK ABOUT THE 24,000,000 AMERICANS LOSING COVERAGE! Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan Goal achieved. You ve given Americans the freedom to die bankrupt. Erich McElroy (@erichmcelroy) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan This tweet isn t a misrepresentation it s a straight up lie. Seth Grahame-Smith (@sethgs) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan Quick question: When you sell your soul, whose blood do you sign with? Your own, right? Ryan Parker (@TheRyanParker) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan Why don t you just tell the truth about the new law? You believe the gov t shouldn t be providing health care, right? Say so Jeremy Greenfield (@jdgreenfield) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan it literally says 24 million people will be uninsured by 2026, how fucking evil are you dude? Jeremy M (@thismyshow) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan that s not what the report says. You re a dumb liar and your selfish actions will kill people. Myles Tanzer (@mylestanzer) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan 24 million people will lose coverage, as per the CBO s report. _Your own guy_ is saying this bill is a healthcare disaster. Laura Anne Gilman (@LAGilman) March 13, 2017.@SpeakerRyan the CBO report says literally the opposite. Specifically, how premiums will go up and will cause 24 million to lose insurance Emanuel Zbeda (@therealezway) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan You re a liar and I wish hell was real. BenDavid Grabinski (@bdgrabinski) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan It will. Take insurance. Away from. 24 million people. Who will die. And the blood. Will be on. Your hands. K. Thor Jensen (@kthorjensen) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan you re a disingenuous amoral shitstain Matthew Kory (@mattymatty2000) March 13, 2017@speakerryan You re a walking pile of horseshit shaped like a man. Robot Chicken (@cyborgturkey) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan I wonder if @oreillyfactor still has that No Spin Zone segment cause this is some dressed up trash. 24 million w/o access! Sophia (@SophiaTesfaye) March 13, 2017.@SpeakerRyan for real, what report are you reading that caused you to draw *this* conclusion? Jay Willis (@jaywillis) March 13, 2017.@SpeakerRyan Did you even read it? Beth Elderkin (@BethElderkin) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Bruce Holsinger (@bruceholsinger) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan BRO seriously do even READ? AltUSCustoms (@alt_uscbp) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan By improve access do you mean making 24 million people lose coverage? Joe Hurwitz (@Joe_Hurwitz) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan Facts : CBO confirmed 24 Million will lose their Health Care : You ve put us all in danger https://t.co/R7UTjARnVi pic.twitter.com/WqHckwAxAm Jolene Sugarbaker (@JolenesTrailer) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan Your willingness to lie and let people die to save millionaires some money makes my skin crawl. Nerdista (@Nerdista) March 13, 2017@SpeakerRyan You are a pile of earwax in a suit. Dennis Perkins (@DennisPerkins5) March 13, 2017The CBO s report shows a bloodbath that Republicans are couching in pretty flowers, and Ryan is busy trying to convince us that the pretty flowers are all that exist here. Perhaps, in his mind, the scent of the flowers will cover the scent of blood in this if he just says it will enough times.Featured image via Win McNamee/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3214 | 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: ALDI Coupons Facebook Scam Claim summaries: An offer on Facebook for free ALDI grocery coupons is not legitimate.
contextual information: In July 2019, an $80 coupon began circulating on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common "free coupon" or "free gift card" scams that frequently plague social media and have also targeted shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target. A different scam coupon offer also circulated with the ALDI logo in December 2015, advertising a "get 40% off all purchases in store" promise. Another displayed what appeared to be a free coupon for "$60 off a minimum $70 purchase," and even one for $75 off: "Aldi has a coupon for $60 off a minimum $70 purchase. Aldi has verified this is a scam, but people are sharing it all over Facebook." These coupons are not legitimate, as ALDI themselves noted on their Facebook page. These coupon offers are a form of survey scams that direct victims to either a survey on a website not owned by ALDI or what looks like a Facebook page for ALDI. The survey pages and the Facebook page have no affiliation with the company, despite being adorned with the ALDI logo. Both instruct people to share the bogus ALDI coupon offer on their Facebook timelines and submit comments about it. This page instructs shoppers to follow these "two simple steps" in order to get their coupons. Once the steps are completed, however, users are not greeted with information explaining how to claim their coupons. Instead, they're asked to take a brief survey that entails providing personal information such as home address, telephone number, email address, and date of birth, and are required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in a number of subscription programs to obtain their "free" gift cards. A version of the scam also surfaced in May 2016, and another later in 2018. ALDI responded to frustrated consumers on Facebook. In June 2017, a version of the scam touting discounts in honor of ALDI's purported anniversary also appeared on Facebook: "HEY FRIENDS CHECK THIS OUT!!!!! Aldi is giving Free $75 Coupon to Everyone to celebrate 103rd Anniversary! Each Person (1)- Go & get yours! ALDI-COM.COM." However, attempting to visit the linked domain (ALDI-COM.com) led to a "deceptive site ahead" warning and not to ALDI's official website. If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll encounter one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: " | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3215 | 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: Farting Burns 67 Calories? Claim summaries: Contrary to Internet search engine wisdom, farting does not burn 67 calories and is not a practical weight loss mechanism.
contextual information: In mid-November 2015, many Internet users became aware that Google returned an interesting search result to those who asked the search engine if farting burned calories: aware Although Google may return the results shown above to such a query, the source the search engine cited for this information, a Facebook page called "F A C T," does not offer any evidence proving this claim. In fact, the only source provided by "F A C T" was Google itself: "Google is your friend if you think these facts are false." page The Facebook page "F A C T," however, didn't pull this number out of thin air. The claim that a single fart burns approximately 67 calories has been floating around the internet since at least 2009, when an Internet troll responded to a question on ChaCha thusly: question How many calories does farting burn? The amount of calories burned by farting would depend on how long the fart lasts and how much energy you use to do it. Some people believe you can burn up to 67 calories by releasing gas. It should be noted that similar inquiries posed via ChaCha also prompted answers of less than one calorie, not very many calories, and no calories. less not very many no So how many calories do you burn during a single fart? Unsurprisingly, we weren't able to uncover much scientific research on the subject. But according to a post on the web site Fat Loss School, the number is much lower than 67: number Some people get a bit desperate when it comes to weight loss. They start wondering which of their daily activities burns enough calories to warrant increasing the frequency. We get questions about calorie consumption in a host of different scenarios. But perhaps the strangest question posed to date is: how many calories do you burn by farting? If you take a moment to think about this, the answer is rather obvious: none! When you fart, your muscles relax and the gas pressure in your bowels do all the work in expelling the gas. The only way you would achieve a measureable figure in the calories burned farting is if you really strained yourself to the limit. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3216 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Poland wants to be sure that Christian traditions are not subject to ideological censorship in the European Union, Prime Minister Beata Szydlo said on Thursday, emphasizing her party s opposition to Muslim immigration. Along with Hungary, Poland has refused to take in any of its quota of the wave of refugees from Syria and elsewhere who have come to Europe since 2015, on the grounds that Muslim immigrants are a threat to their national security and stability. Szydlo s eurosceptic Law and Justice (PiS) party appeals directly to the more socially conservative sections of Poland s overwhelmingly Roman Catholic population. In a foreign policy speech marking the midpoint of the parliamentary term, Szydlo said Christians in Europe should not need to feel uncomfortable or ashamed about their faith and traditions. We are in favor of (an EU) where Christian traditions are not subject to ideological censorship, she told a conference organized by the Polish Institute of International Affairs. Opinion polls in Poland | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3217 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Spanish government will hold a special cabinet meeting at 6 p.m. local time (1600 GMT) to enforce direct rule over Catalonia, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said on Friday, after the region declared independence from Spain. Spain is a serious country and a great nation and we will not tolerate that a few people try liquidate our constitution, Rajoy told journalists after the upper house of parliament allowed him to take control of Catalonia. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3218 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: If you re not okay with taxpayers paying for exorbitant medical costs, including transgender surgeries for military members, you ll want to remember these names in 2018 A majority in the House voted down a proposal to restrict funding for transgender members of the military, standing by social policy changes enacted by the Pentagon under former President Barack Obama.Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., succeeded in forcing a vote, arguing that Obama s transgender decision is costly in dollars and short on common sense. The attempted rollback failed on a 209-214 vote, however, as 24 Republicans joined a unanimous Democratic caucus in opposing the proposal. The Obama transgender policy, which was implemented without input from members of Congress, is ill-conceived and contrary to our goals of increasing troop readiness and investing defense dollars into addressing budget shortfalls of the past, Hartzler said in June. By recruiting and allowing transgender individuals to serve in our military we are subjecting taxpayers to high medical costs including up to $130,000 per transition surgery, lifetime hormone treatments, and additional surgeries to address the high percentage of individuals who experience complications. Her amendment would have barred the Defense Department from provid[ing] medical treatment (other than mental health treatment) related to gender transition to members of the military. Proponents of transgender military service argued that her proposal would reduce military readiness by discouraging transgender Americans from serving. It would have a negative impact on morale, a negative impact on retention and move us away from the merit-based system which we now have, where we have one set of rules applied to everybody, Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., who co-chairs the LGBT Equality Caucus, said Wednesday.Hartzler maintained that her amendment would increase readiness, however. The deployability of individuals going through the sex transition process is highly problematic, requiring 210 to 238 work days where a soldier is non-deployable after surgery, she said. This recovery time equates to 1.4 million manpower days where transgender personnel cannot deploy and fight our nation s wars, therefore relying on an already stressed force to pick up the burden. It makes no sense to purposely recruit individuals who cannot serve. Washington ExaminerHere s the list of 24 Republicans who voted to keep Obama s transgender policy for our military in place that was implemented without input from members of Congress:Justin Amash (Michigan)Jack Bergman (Michigan)Mike Coffman (Colorado)Barbara Comstock (Virginia)Paul Cook (California)Ryan Costello (Pennsylvania)Carlos Curbelo (Florida)Jeff Denham (California)Charlie Dent (Pennsylvania)John Faso (New York)Brian Fitzpatrick (Pennsylvania)Darrell Issa (California)John Katko (New York)Steve Knight (California)Leonard Lance (New Jersey)Frank LoBiondo (New Jersey)Tom MacArthur (New Jersey)Brian Mast (Florida)Tom Reed (New York)Dave Reichert (Washington)Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Florida)Bill Shuster (Pennsylvania)Elise Stefanik (New York)Claudia Tenney (New York)h/t Truth Division | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3219 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Monday, 14 November 2016 Obama thinking about where he will live if Trump deports him.
Washington, DC It has long been a tradition for U.S. Presidents leaving office to pardon people. President Clinton pardoned 140 in the last days of his office.
Some of the celebrities requesting meetings with Obama, besides the obvious like O.J. Simpson and Phil Spector, are Jared Fogle, Sirhan Sirhan, Charles Manson, and Bernie Madoff.
Probably the most bizarre was Bill Cosby. Legal staff members for Obama informed Cosby that Obama couldn't pardon Cosby because he hadn't been found guilty of anything yet.
"What if I bibbly bob say I boo-hoosy DID put my doggone White Owly cigar in her Jello Pudding Popsy? Can I get a bipsy pipsy pardonski then?" asked Cosby.
Obama has not made any pardons yet because he has been gathering evidence he was born in the U.S. so he won't get deported once Trump is President. Make Al N.'s day - give this story five thumbs-up (there's no need to register , the thumbs are just down there!) | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3220 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Donald Trump is getting nothing but bad news when it comes to finding performers willing to degrade themselves at his inauguration.Earlier today, internationally renowned vocalist Charlotte Church told Trump that he should not have even bothered asking her to sing at his inauguration because she doesn t perform for tyrants.@realDonaldTrump Your staff have asked me to sing at your inauguration, a simple Internet search would show I think you re a tyrant. Bye???? Charlotte Church (@charlottechurch) January 10, 2017Church s tweet drew outrage from Trump supporters but she wasn t the only musician to reject Trump.As it turns out, Trump and his team also invited Moby to DJ at the inauguration. And Moby responded by laughing hysterically in Trump s face and told him he d only consider on one condition. And Trump isn t going to like it. Hahahahaha, I was just asked by a booking agent if I would consider djing at one of the inaugural balls for #trump Hahahahaha, wait, Hahahaha, really? I guess I d DJ at an inaugural ball if as payment #trump released his tax returns. I m still laughing, Moby continued. Hahahaha. So #trump what do you think, I DJ for you and you release your tax returns? Here s the full statement via Instagram.Hahahahaha, I was just asked by a booking agent if I would consider djing at one of the inaugural balls for #trump Hahahahaha, wait, Hahahaha, really? I guess I d DJ at an inaugural ball if as payment #trump released his tax returns. Also I would probably play public enemy and stockhausen remixes to entertain the republicans. I m still laughing. Hahahaha. So #trump what do you think, I DJ for you and you release your tax returns?A photo posted by moby X X (@moby) on Jan 9, 2017 at 8:52am PSTDonald Trump refused to release his tax returns throughout the presidential campaign, breaking decades of precedent and setting a dangerous new precedent for future presidential contenders.And it s very clear why Trump refused to release his taxes and continues to do so. When the New York Times obtained a copy of just one year of Trump s tax returns it showed that he wrote off a nearly $1 billion loss that allowed him to avoid paying federal income taxes for nearly 20 years. So not only is Trump a draft-dodger, he s a tax dodger as well.It s also clear that Moby is not a fan of Trump. He was a supporter of Hillary Clinton and has been mocking Trump ever since Election Day, including this gem commenting on Trump s cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin.Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.A photo posted by moby X X (@moby) on Jan 9, 2017 at 10:39am PSTTrump must be truly desperate if he s seriously asking Moby to perform.Featured image via Instagram | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3221 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Donald Trump is the ultimate hypocrite and Fox host Chris Wallace called him out for it on Sunday.During the campaign, Trump repeatedly bashed positive monthly jobs reports by claiming that they were somehow being faked by President Obama to make it appear that the economy was improving under his watch. Trump dismissed the low unemployment rate as well, claiming that he heard that it was much higher, as high as 42 percent, which is an outrageous lie.Chris Wallace played footage of this while interviewing Trump s chief economic adviser and former Goldman Sachs executive. You know, the same Goldman Sachs that Donald Trump repeatedly vilified during the campaign because of Hillary Clinton s ties to them.Anyway, Wallace pointed out that while Trump is touting the recent February jobs report that shows the economy added 235,000 jobs and the unemployment rate dropped from 4.8 to 4.7 percent, he is clearly being a hypocrite because he called previous jobs reports phony. If that s true, why should we believe these numbers? Wallace demanded to know before noting that Trump inherited a strengthening economy from the Obama administration. And the fact is, did you inherit an economy that has been for the last 18 months somewhere between 4.6 and 5 percent unemployment? Of course, rather than admit that Trump is full of shit, Cohn ignored the question and made it sound like Trump is an economic hero. The economy continues to grow and we are doing out part, Cohn said before claiming that CEOs are telling Trump that they are adding jobs because of him. We are creating these jobs because of you, Mr. President, and your policies. Which have not, yet, come into any sort of effect.Here s the video via YouTube:The bottom line is that the economy is continuing to grow because of President Obama s economic policies. Many of the investment plans that companies are announcing right now were in motion well before the election in November. But Trump has been desperately trying to take credit for the economy.So let s all remember how Trump is currently taking credit for all the good economic news. Because once the economy implodes under his watch, he ll definitely try to blame the black guy for it.Featured Image: Screenshot | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3222 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Twenty Years of a Dictatorial Democracy By James Bovard
" Washington Times " - The 2016 election campaign is mortifying millions of Americans in part because the presidency has become far more dangerous in recent times. Since Sept. 11, 2001, we have lived in a perpetual emergency, which supposedly justifies routinely ignoring the law and Constitution. And both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have signaled that power grabs will proliferate in the next four years.
Politicians talk as if voting magically protects the rights of everyone within a 50-mile radius of the polling booth. But the ballots Americans have cast in presidential elections since 2000 did nothing to constrain the commander in chief.
President George W. Bushs declaration in 2000 that America needed a more humble foreign policy did not deter him from vowing to rid the world of evil and launching the most catastrophic war in American history. Eight years later, Barack Obama campaigned as the candidate of peace and promised a new birth of freedom. But that did not stop him from bombing seven nations, claiming a right to assassinate American citizens, and championing Orwellian total surveillance.
Mr. Bush was famous for signing statements decrees that nullified hundreds of provisions of laws enacted by Congress. President Obama is renowned for unilaterally and endlessly rewriting laws such as the Affordable Care Act to postpone political backlashes against the Democratic Party and for effectively waiving federal immigration law. Both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama exploited the state secrets doctrine to shield their most controversial policies from the American public.
While many conservatives applauded Mr. Bushs power grabs, many liberals cheered Mr. Obamas decrees. After 16 years of Bush-Obama, the federal government is far more arbitrary and lethal. Richard Nixons maxim its not illegal if the president does it is the lodestar for commanders in chief in the new century.
There is no reason to expect the next president to be less power hungry than the last two White House occupants. Both Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton can be expected to trample the First Amendment. Mr. Trump has talked of shutting down mosques and changing libel laws to make it far more perilous for the media to reveal abuses by the nations elite. Mrs. Clinton was in the forefront of an administration that broke all records for prosecuting leakers and journalists who exposed government abuses. She could smash the remnants of the Freedom of Information Act like her aides hammered her Blackberry phones to obliterate her email trail.
Neither candidate seems to recognize any limit on presidential power. Mr. Trump calls for reviving the brutal interrogation methods of the George W. Bush era. Mrs. Clinton opposes torture but believes presidents have a right to launch wars whenever they decide it is in the national interest. After Mrs. Clinton helped persuade Mr. Obama to bomb Libya in 2011, she signaled that the administration would scorn any congressional cease-and-desist order under the War Powers Act.
If Americans could be confident that either Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton would be leashed by the law, there would be less dread about who wins in November. But elections are becoming simply coronations via vote counts. The president will take an oath of office on Inauguration Day, but then can do as he or she pleases.
We now have a political system which is nominally democratic but increasingly authoritarian. The rule oflLaw has been defined down to finding a single federal lawyer to write a secret memo vindicating the presidents latest unpublished executive order.
By the end of the next presidential term, America will have had almost a 20-year stretch of dictatorial democracy. Our rulers disdain for the highest law of the land is torpedoing the citizenrys faith in representative government. Forty percent of registered voters have lost faith in American democracy, according to recent Survey Monkey poll.
The United States may be on the verge of the biggest legitimacy crisis since the Civil War. Whoever wins on Nov. 8 will be profoundly distrusted even before being sworn in. The combination of a widely detested new president and unrestrained power almost guarantees greater crises in the coming years.
Neither Mr. Trump nor Mrs. Clinton are promising to make America constitutional again. But as Thomas Jefferson declared in 1786, An elective despotism was not the government we fought for. If presidents are lawless, then voters are merely designating the most dangerous criminal in the land.
James Bovard is the author of Attention Deficit Democracy (Palgrave, 2006) and Lost Rights (St. Martins, 1994). | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3223 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A Zimbabwean court on Saturday refused to strike down subversion charges against an American citizen who now faces 11 days in a Harare jail until her next court hearing. Martha O Donovan, who works for Magamba TV, which describes itself as Zimbabwe s leading producer of political satire, was on Friday charged by police, who also accused her of insulting President Robert Mugabe. Lawyers for O Donovan, who appeared in court in jeans and a checked shirt, argued before magistrate Nomsa Sarabauta that police only informed O Donovan of the more serious charges of attempting to subvert the government hours after her arrest, thereby violating the constitution. But the magistrate said she was satisfied the officers complied with the law and dismissed the application. The charge carries a sentence of up to 20 years in jail. A U.S. State Department official said on Saturday that the government was aware of reports that a U.S. citizen was detained in Zimbabwe. We stand ready to provide appropriate consular assistance for U.S. citizens . Lawyer Obey Shava said he would now apply for bail at the High Court on Monday. O Donovan, who denies the charges against her, was not formally charged nor was she asked to plead in court, where she will return on Nov. 15. The case against her centers around a post on Twitter last month in which O Donovan allegedly called 93-year-old Mugabe a selfish and sick man . Her arrest comes after the creation of a Ministry of Cyber Security last month. Mugabe s government has been particularly uneasy about social media after activists such as pastor Evan Mawarire and his #ThisFlag movement last year used social media to organize a stay-at-home demonstration, the biggest anti-government protest in a decade. A national election is due in 2018. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3224 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Scott Pelley, host of CBS News’ 60 Minutes, embarrassed himself in a Sunday segment about “fake news†— despite having the final cut on a hostile interview with a activist. [Mike Cernovich — a lawyer, independent and a dominant voice on Twitter — built up significant buzz for 60 Minutes by revealing on Thursday he had granted Pelley a interview. In the hours before the live broadcast, Cernovich anticipated that the conversation would be “selectively edited†and published a partial transcript. That concern is based on a long history of network news programs using misleading or downright comical editing to put conservatives in the worst possible light. As the segment aired, Pelley’s opening statement made it clear this story was a smear job: In this last election, the nation was assaulted by impostors masquerading as reporters. They poisoned the conversation with lies on the left and on the right. Many did it to influence the outcome — others just to make a buck. The president uses the term “fake news†to discredit responsible reporting that he doesn’t like. But we’re going to show you how con artists insert truly fake news into the national conversation with fraudulent software that scams your social media account. The stories are fake, but the consequences are real. [emphasis added] Later on, Pelley introduced Cernovich with depicting him, rather unsubtly, like a little boy hunched over his laptop — calling him “a magnet for readers with a taste for stories with no basis in factâ€: Even with this setup, Pelley ended up humiliating himself — not his target. Watch the key exchange: That story got so much traction, it had to be denied not only by Clinton’s doctor, but by the National Parkinson’s Foundation. ( ) pic. twitter. — 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) March 27, 2017, Pelley brought up an article on Cernovich’s website where a physician, who later outed himself as Orlando anesthesiologist Dr. Ted Noel, argued that an explanation for Clinton’s bizarre physical tics could be Parkinson’s disease. While confronting Cernovich about the oversold headline (“Hillary Clinton Has Parkinson’s Disease, Physician Confirmsâ€) Pelley exposed his own credulous belief in an unproven claim: Cernovich: She had a seizure and froze up walking into her motorcade that day [September 11, 2016]. Pelley: Well, she had pneumonia. I mean — Cernovich: How do you know? Who told you that? Pelley: Well, the campaign told us that. Cernovich: Why would you trust the campaign? Pelley: The point is you didn’t talk to anybody who’d ever examined Hillary Clinton. Cernovich: I don’t take anything Hillary Clinton is gonna say at all as true. I’m not gonna take her on her word. The media says we’re not gonna take Donald Trump on his word. And that’s why we are in these different universes. Pelley has no answer for those six words — “Why would you trust the campaign†— as his entire profession goes berserk with fact checks for every tweet from President Trump. Pelley also seems to forget the fakery that Clinton World attempted hours before its pneumonia statement — with the candidate smiling and waving outside her daughter’s apartment, greeting a little girl, and assuring reporters everything was . Clinton just left her daughters apartment. When asked how she was feeling, Clinton said, â€Great. I’m feeling great.†— Dan Merica (@danmericaCNN) September 11, 2016, Cernovich’s followers — and even some of his biggest detractors — declared the interview a loss for Pelley: … and you can see it in the exact moment Cernovich flipped the interview on Pelley pic. twitter. — Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) March 27, 2017, @mattdpearce pelley was surprisingly unprepared, — Will Sommer (@willsommer) March 27, 2017, Cernovich is a crazy person and a con man but Pelley walked right into that buzzsaw. — Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) March 27, 2017, shamefully stupid piece connecting cernovich to people who buy twitter bots, — noah kulwin (@nkulw) March 27, 2017, @occhipig Pelley’s response sucked but he’s responding to an item WITH NO BASIS IN FACT. But I’m honestly not here to convince you. — Richard Deitsch (@richarddeitsch) March 27, 2017, Charlie Warzel of BuzzFeed said Pelley “didn’t do his homework on Cernovich … And it showed, despite the fact that CBS got to edit down the video [emphasis added]. †Cernovich has since published another partial transcript of his conversation with Pelley and called for CBS to release the full video, crediting his appearance with bumping the show’s recent average of 10. 8 million viewers to somewhere between 14 and 16 million viewers. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3225 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A regional parliament has lifted the immunity of the best known politician in the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, opening the way for prosecutors to pursue possible perjury charges against her. Frauke Petry, who is the AfD s co-chairwoman, has been dogged by allegations that she lied under oath to a committee of the Saxony parliament about how the party s campaign for the 2014 election in the state was financed. The ending of her immunity from prosecution adds to the right-wing party s problems less than four weeks before a national election. Weakened by infighting, it has bled support over the last year as voters concerns about immigration have eased. Prosecutors have pursued the case against Petry, who denies the allegations, for more than a year. Her immunity as a member of the Saxony s parliament ended at midnight, a spokesman for the assembly said. A spokesman for prosecutors in the state capital Dresden said they would await written confirmation of that from the parliament s president before any further proceedings could be agreed upon. The AfD is polling between 7 and 10 percent in opinion surveys | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3226 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Sen. Rand Paul ( ) a top conservative in the U. S. Senate, unloaded on House Speaker Paul Ryan’s Obamacare 2. 0 replacement plan — that does not repeal Obamacare — in an exclusive interview on Wednesday with Breitbart News. [In the interview, Paul accused Ryan of misleading President Donald Trump on the process and the level of support in the House for the bill that House GOP leadership — at Ryan’s direction — put forward this week. The House Freedom Caucus was publicly against this strategy before Ryan even rolled it out. The group of more than 40 House conservatives remains steadfastly opposed to Ryan’s plan on this front, showing no signs of breaking as they signaled before it was introduced, and now many Republican offices outside the House Freedom Caucus privately tell Breitbart News that as many as 70 or more House Republicans are opposed to Ryan’s plan. Leadership knows this too, they say, as all the “hard no†votes have told the Speaker’s office or the whip teams they cannot vote for this bill. But Ryan is plowing forward, stating at a number of press conferences this week he is confident he will receive the 218 votes he needs to pass the bill — even though he clearly does not have them right now. When asked what Ryan’s strategy is here, Paul told Breitbart News it makes no sense — and that he believes that the Speaker is deliberately misleading President Trump into thinking he has more support for this bill than he has, and that its fate is not in crisis. Paul is confident that conservative House and Senate Republicans will stick together, defeat this bill, and then work with President Trump to separate repeal and replacement into different bills passed on the same day down the road. The fact that Paul is saying Ryan is misleading Trump is an explosive charge, but is backed by the evidence of widespread mistrust in the House GOP conference over this bill and Ryan’s waning influence as Speaker — dislike of it extends far beyond the House Freedom Caucus, as Breitbart News can confirm. Paul told Breitbart News: I don’t think it makes any sense and I think he’s trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the president. I think when I’ve spoken with president Trump, I think he agrees with me that we should repeal and replace but I don’t think he’s stuck on that they have to be in the same bill necessarily. Paul Ryan, I think, is selling it to the White House and telling the White House, ‘Oh, it’s a piece of cake, it’s a done deal.’ And I don’t think that’s an accurate depiction of things. I think from the very beginning combining repeal and replace in one bill makes it very hard because we have different ideas on replace. We are pretty much united on repeal, but we have different ideas on replace. If the House leadership had come forward and talked to conservatives beforehand, I think they would have found out there is a lot of disagreement and they would have just passed what we already passed — what everybody voted for — and we also have a debate on the same day on a variety of replacement strategies. We still could do that. And I think if the House Freedom Caucus and the Senate conservatives stay together, I still think that that’s one possible outcome. It would be better for all of us if we separated it out with clean repeal and had replacement as a separate bill. Discussing my opposition to Obamacare Lite with @mboyle1 @BreitbartNews #cleanrepeal pic. twitter. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 8, 2017, A senior congressional aide in a House Republican office whose member is not part of the House Freedom Caucus told Breitbart News his boss is also opposed to Ryan’s Obamacare 2. 0, and that there is much more widespread Republican opposition to Ryan’s plan than leadership originally expected. “I think you’re looking at 60 to 70 noes right now on the floor,†the aide told Breitbart News. “The phone lines have been blowing up with opposition to what they’re calling . This is a hell of a Mexican standoff — it’s Freedom Caucus versus Trump, and Ryan who I think is driving the process. Who blinks here? It’s bigger than the Freedom Caucus but the Freedom Caucus has planted their flag on this one. Who’s going to blink first?†A second GOP congressional aide in another Freedom Caucus office told Breitbart News their boss is against it as well, and that Ryan has “way more than 70 not with him. †These two offices and others that are not part of the Freedom Caucus but are opposed to the legislation told Breitbart News that the only reason they are not publicly coming out against the bill is because they do not wish to create more chaos around this legislation. If Ryan keeps doubling down, and forcing a vote on this, it will get worse, they say. A staffer in a third GOP office with a member not in the Freedom Caucus but opposed to the legislation even said staff is keeping the member off television to avoid getting connected to Ryan’s Obamacare 2. 0. These numbers show that the Speaker has a serious problem inside his conference and has not thought this through. Paul opened his exclusive interview in his U. S. Senate office in the Russell Senate Office Building by explaining exactly what is wrong with Ryan’s Obamacare bill, a bill he calls “Obamacare Lite. †He said there are four major reasons that Ryan’s bill is wrong specifically that it creates an entitlement program, that it does not effectively handle Obamacare taxes and even keeps the Cadillac Tax indefinitely, the keeping of Obamacare’s individual mandate, and the keeping of Obamacare’s risk corridors — but simply renaming them. Paul told Breitbart News: I think the reason why the House leadership bill is Obamacare Lite is because it retains subsidies. Obamacare had subsidies for people to buy insurance. In the Paul Ryan bill, they keep the subsidies — they just call them refundable tax credits. Some people are predicting that it’s actually going to be more expensive than the subsidies we have under Obamacare. This isn’t you getting your own money back, this is you getting somebody else’s money. So, a family that makes $30, 000 a year could actually get $14, 000 that they didn’t pay. Let’s say they paid zero in income tax, they could get $14, 000 back. One, we don’t have the money — it’s a new entitlement program and two, if you get $14, 000 back do you think the insurance company is ever going to sell insurance for less than $14, 000? That becomes the floor. So, it actually pushes insurance rates up — it doesn’t allow insurance rates to fall. So, that doesn’t allow insurance rates to fall and it sets up a new entitlement. The second thing that Paul Ryan’s Obamacare Lite bill does is they keep the Obamacare taxes — all of them — for a year. And then after a year, they keep the Cadillac Tax forever. That’s the tax on if you have really good insurance, Obamacare taxes that. So will Paul Ryan’s plan. The third thing they do that is is they keep the individual mandate. It seems like every Republican says they were against the individual mandate. That’s if you didn’t buy insurance you had to pay a penalty to the government, a tax. Obamacare Lite, Paul Ryan’s plan, just changes it so you have to pay a penalty to the insurance companies. I consider that to still be a mandate that isn’t consistent with those of us who want less government involvement. So they keep the subsidies, they keep the taxes, and then they keep the mandate. Then the fourth thing they do is they actually subsidize the insurance companies. Right now, insurance companies are losing money and Obamacare has this rescue thing called ‘risk corridors’ to bail out the insurance companies. Paul Ryan has got the same thing, he just calls it reinsurance and it’s $100 million worth. I predict that might not even be enough. So I don’t like any of it. Now, I do think we agree as Republicans on repeal. But I don’t think we agree on the replacement. That’s why I say we should separate them, vote on repeal and then vote the same day on a separate bill that’s called replace. Paul specifically told Breitbart News more about the argument that Ryan’s bill creates an additional entitlement program. He said that, while the House GOP leadership calls it a “refundable tax credit,†it functions in much the same way as Obamacare’s subsidies. Paul said: It’s called a refundable tax credit and I think it’s the same as subsidies. What it is is if you pay nothing in income tax, when you get to the end of the year and you didn’t owe anything in income tax, you can get up to $14, 000 back from the government. But the government doesn’t have any money. So it’s just like Obamacare, they put the subsidies at the federal government level. We’re actually $20 trillion in debt, we’re running a $500 billion deficit, we borrow a million dollars a minute. We don’t have any money to give anybody. So even if everybody said ‘oh we have to give people money and we should keep the Medicaid expansion and all that,’ someone should be honest about it and find where is the money going to come from. So, for example, that’s one of my complaints about Obamacare in general is that it’s a dishonest accounting. They said poor people need help. I agree. I want to help them by lowering the price of their insurance. But they said ‘no, no we want to give them dollars for Medicaid expansion and to buy insurance with subsidies.’ The problem is there is no money to give them so we just add to the deficit. The main thing driving the deficit up here are the entitlements. So I think Paul Ryan’s refundable tax credits are just a new entitlement program. Paul also said he believes the concern — confirmed by Rep. Buddy Carter ( ) a proponent of Obamacare 2. 0, on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight on Tuesday evening — that illegal aliens will have access to Medicaid funds under Ryan’s bill is in fact a “valid concern. †“I think that is a concern — a valid concern,†Paul told Breitbart News. “And I don’t think illegal immigrants — nor do I think we should be admitting people and putting them on welfare. We have enough poor people in our country without importing more people from around the world onto welfare. †When asked if it is too late for Ryan to withdraw this bill and approach repealing and replacing Obamacare in a manner Republicans campaigned on for years, rather than in this convoluted way, Paul said: “No, I don’t think so. †And Paul believes that President Trump will be willing to bargain, given the fact that Ryan’s bill is unlikely to pass either chamber of Congress, according to many Republicans . “President Trump has indicated look, his career in business has been about negotiating deals,†Paul said. “My guess is he realizes this is going to take some negotiation. He seems to be very open to hearing from conservatives. He’s been inviting my input and I’m aware he’s been inviting input from different members of the House Freedom Caucus as well. †Paul also said that the goal here is not to kill any person’s bill or stop repeal of Obamacare — and that Ryan’s recklessness jeopardizes GOP chances to repeal and replace Obamacare. “The goal is to get one that passes,†Paul said. “I think they’re going in the wrong direction, but I think a clean repeal could pass again. †When asked if President Trump is more open to the withdrawing of the leadership bill for his suggested approach to repealing and replacing Obamacare, Paul told Breitbart News: “I think so. †If Trump begins listening to conservatives, he argues, then he believes the president will change course and drop Ryan’s bill for one that has a better chance at success. Paul added: I think what has to happen, and this is just beginning is that conservatives need to get in front of the president. So far it’s been leadership, which are mostly the establishment Republicans. I just think he needs to hear from some conservatives and he will realize there are many different issues. I think he does realize there are many different issues and many different factions out there. It’s complicated. You got to get them all on one page for one bill. It happened 14 months ago, we all voted for clean repeal. So I think there’s at least some evidence people will vote for a clean repeal bill. Paul said that Republicans should pass a clean repeal bill and a replacement bill all on the same day, but he does not believe Ryan’s vision for Obamacare replacement is one that can gain widespread support inside the Republican Party. “Everybody wants repeal and that’s what I keep telling people,†Paul said. “We’re united on repeal, we’re just not united on the replacement part. To me, it makes evidently good sense to divide them, because I don’t think we’re coming to an agreement. If Paul Ryan were sitting right here with us, I don’t think we’d have an agreement on replace, nor do I think we will, because his ideas are Obamacare Lite and conservatives in this country just aren’t for that. †Trump is reportedly heading to Kentucky this weekend as part of what seems to be a feckless effort to pressure Paul into backing down. It comes after Trump Tweeted at Paul on Tuesday evening. I feel sure that my friend @RandPaul will come along with the new and great health care program because he knows Obamacare is a disaster! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 8, 2017, While Paul said he welcomes the president to Kentucky if he is indeed headed there, and that he supports the president on a number of fronts, he will not back down when it comes to battling Obamacare and fighting to repeal and replace the healthcare law. Paul told Breitbart News: We welcome the president to Kentucky. He’s very popular in Kentucky. And one of the reasons he’s very popular is he has said he will fight for the families who work in the coal mines. The first regulation we repealed was something that would have hurt our coal miners even more and I went to the White House and supported the president on that. I’ve supported the president on the overwhelmingly conservative cabinet that he’s put forward. I’ve supported the president on really, virtually every issue so far so I think we actually have a good relationship and I think there’s a possibility for continued negotiation with him. The grassroots Americans who propelled Trump into the White House after electing Paul to the U. S. Senate in 2010 and again in 2016 — as well as powering GOP majorities in the House and Senate — are with him and the conservatives, Paul said. The grassroots nationwide are not with Ryan and the leadership plan. He went on to say: I think this is big, and I think it becomes bigger over time as the more people hear about it and the more people begin to talk about it. When the Tea Party movement started back in 2009, we had hundreds of thousands of people showing up mostly unhappy with Obamacare. When they find out that the House leadership wants to keep part of Obamacare, they’re going to be livid. So every day they’re hearing about it and every day I think the voice is going to become stronger. But I still think there’s common ground. I think Republicans by and large have been for repeal. Let’s just do a repeal bill. †And Paul is slightly shocked that Republicans have not thought this through more clearly when they have had seven years to get here. He said, “Some of us did think we had a thought through strategy because we voted on it 14 months ago. We thought we were going to get the same thing. And I think it would have been very easy for leadership on both sides — House and Senate — alright guys, men and women, we voted on this once and we’re going to do it again. Then we’ll come up with ideas for replacement strategies. I think in some ways they just got a little bit ahead of themselves by thinking ‘oh, we’ll just stick all these replacement ideas in the repeal package’ which would be fine if they were replacement strategies we all agree on like health savings accounts. We all agree on that. Stick that in there, I’m fine with that. Get rid of some of the regulations, I’m fine with that. But I’m just not fine with creating new government programs. And I don’t think conservatives are going to back down on this. Conservatives are going to say, look, if you guys want that I think it’s going to have to be a separate vote. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3227 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: There were prayers and expressions of sympathy for the victims after a gunman opened fire on Republican lawmakers practicing for a charity baseball game, but no signs of a new push in the U.S. Congress to tighten gun-control laws on Wednesday. In a country where there are almost as many guns as people, gun ownership is fiercely defended by firearms industry lobbyists and Republican politicians, who now control the Senate, the House of Representatives and the White House. In addition to the shooting at a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia, a man dressed in a UPS uniform and armed with an “assault pistol†opened fire at a United Parcel Service Inc (UPS.N) package sorting hub in San Francisco, killing three people before turning the gun on himself, police said. Also, one man was shot outside a shopping center near a major sports arena in New York City on Wednesday but it was not immediately clear who opened fire or how badly the victim was hurt, police said. Despite the day’s carnage, there was no immediate indication that President Donald Trump or his fellow Republicans would shift from their position protecting gun ownership rights. Pro-gun voters lean heavily toward the Republican Party. Several House Republicans who attended a briefing following the shooting were asked by reporters about the need for gun control legislation. “Everyone was focused on the facts of the case†and what might be needed to enhance lawmakers’ security, said Republican Representative Barbara Comstock. The lawmakers did not indicate gun control was discussed. Immediately following mass shootings, politicians typically are hesitant to talk about partisan legislative matters. Aides to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, whose panel would have jurisdiction, were asked if Wednesday’s shootings showed the need for legislation. A reply from Goodlatte, provided by aides, said his “prayers are with Congressman Steve Scalise†and the others injured. Spokesmen for the National Rifle Association (NRA), the powerful pro-gun rights lobbying group and a Republican Party ally, were not immediately available for comment. Democrats, who generally, though not uniformly, are more aggressive about gun control laws, expressed concern following the Alexandria incident, in which Republican Representative Steve Scalise and several other people were shot. “There are too many guns on the street,†said Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat. Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent who sought the Democratic presidential nomination last year, said, “We’ve got to stop the violence.†Democratic Representative Tim Ryan, who described himself as a strong supporter of gun rights, told reporters that “does not mean we should not have universal background checks†to gauge gun buyers’ mental health and to check on whether they are on terrorism watch lists. “It is entirely appropriate to ask those questions,†Ryan said of expanded gun control legislation. Many Republicans recently have opposed expanded background checks for gun buyers and limiting access to assault rifles. Scalise, the No. 3 Republican in the House, has worked to oppose new federal gun controls that he has seen as an assault on the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to bear arms. “We don’t expect the solutions to this issue ever to be found in the wake of a single tragedy no matter who is shot, no matter how horrific it is,†Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said in a telephone interview. Gun control groups are fighting federal legislation that would relax existing gun laws, especially after Republicans backed by the NRA fared well in last November’s elections. The Republican-controlled House this year passed a bill making it harder for veterans who have been deemed mentally incompetent to be turned down for gun purchases. Gross said that despite the House vote, the measure “is not going anywhere in the Senate.†He also said gun control organizations have held back passage in Congress of legislation giving states with concealed weapons laws reciprocity in all other states. A year ago, Congress was in a gun control debate after the shooting deaths of 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. Democrats ramped up their pro-gun control push, staging a filibuster in the Senate and a “sit-in†in the House to disrupt Republican-controlled proceedings. In the end, no legislation passed either chamber to tighten access to guns. Chelsea Parsons, vice president for guns and crime policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, noted however, that since the 2012 shooting in Connecticut resulting in the deaths of 20 first-graders and six staff members at an elementary school, several states have imposed new limits on gun sales. “There’s going to come a breaking point in the disconnect between what Congress is willing to do and what the American people demand,†Parsons said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3228 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Violent protests erupted in India s Haryana state on Friday, killing at least 29 people, after a court convicted a self-styled godman of raping two women, angering thousands of his supporters who said he was innocent, the state chief minister said. Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, the head of a social welfare and spiritual group, was found guilty of raping two followers in a case dating back to 2002 at the headquarters of his Dera Sacha Sauda group in the northern town of Sirsa. Supporters rampaged in response, attacking railway stations, petrol stations and television vans in towns across the northern states of Punjab and Haryana, witnesses said. At least 29 people were killed in Panchkula town where the court returned its verdict on Singh and more than 200 people were injured in Haryana state. We tried to prevent the unrest in every possible way, but the protesters were totally out of control, Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal told Reuters. All the injured are getting the best treatment in government hospitals, he said. Dozens of cars were burning in Panchkula town while a bloodied body lay in the middle of a road. About 500 army soldiers were deployed to restore order. The situation is coming under control, federal home secretary Rajiv Mehrishi said in New Delhi. Television footage showed frantic scenes outside a hospital in Panchkula, with medical staff hurriedly transferring injured patients from ambulances on to wheelchairs and stretchers. Smoke could be seen rising in another part of town. Singh commands a following that he claims is in the millions, many of them elderly men and women in the countryside, drawn by his social welfare programs such as medical camps and disaster relief. The court, which held him guilty of rape, set his sentencing for Monday when there could be more protests. He faces a minimum of seven years in prison. Singh, a burly, bearded man who has scripted and starred in his own films, had denied the charges. He had called on his followers through a video message to remain peaceful. A.K. Dhir, one of his lawyers, said Singh was innocent and his followers had every right to express their outrage. Protests also erupted in Punjab, New Delhi and the neighboring state of Rajasthan. Supporters of Singh set fire to some buses and two empty train coaches in the capital. Nearly 1,000 members of his Sacha Sauda group were detained. A close aide of Prime Minister Narendra Modi said federal and state officials had been instructed to work round the clock to restore law and order. The instances of violence today are deeply distressing. I strongly condemn the violence & urge everyone to maintain peace, Modi said on Twitter. Some Indian holy men can summon thousands of supporters onto the streets. Their systems of patronage and sermons are hugely popular with people who consider the government has failed them. In 2014, the attempted arrest of another guru on murder charges ended with his followers attacking police with clubs and stones. Television channels showed motorcycles, cars and buses in flames in Panchkula as hundreds of police personnel in riot gear watched helplessly. The mob also toppled a TV outdoor broadcasting van, while several news channels said their journalists were targeted. Besides the rape charges, Singh is also under investigation over allegations that he convinced 400 of his male followers to undergo castration, allegations he denies. A variety of reasons have been given for why the men agreed to castration, including promises of becoming closer to god. Singh s two films, Messenger of God and its sequel, include sequences in which he fights off villains and tosses burning motorbikes into the air. In his spiritual avatar, Singh dresses in plain white traditional clothes, giving sermons or planting trees. In the movies he dons bejewelled costumes, rides motorbikes and sends bad guys flying. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3229 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The head of a new Pakistani Islamist party that lionizes the killer of a provincial governor said it would take its rallying cry of death to blasphemers to next year s general election, after its surprisingly strong showing in a recent vote. The Tehrik-e-Labaik Pakistan party, which won more than 7,000 votes at a weekend by-election, was born out of a protest movement supporting Mumtaz Qadri, a bodyguard of the governor of Punjab province who gunned down his boss in 2011 over his call to reform strict blasphemy laws. Supporters of Tehreek-e-Labaik waved photos of Qadri, who became an icon for Muslim hardliners after his execution last year, at campaign rallies in the eastern city of Lahore, where it won 6 percent of the vote in a contest for the seat vacated by ousted former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. He is a hero, party leader Khadim Hussain Rizvi said when asked about Qadri, adding that after its third-place finish in Sunday s by-election it would focus on next year s poll. Our preparation starts from today. We will contest bravely. While the party has almost no chance of gaining power next year, it is part of a new crop of political movements that espouse stricter Islamic rule as a remedy to corruption accusations and squabbling among Pakistan s three main parties. A stronger showing for Islamists could give them more influence after the election, expected to be hard-fought after the Supreme Court barred Sharif from holding office. In an interview with Reuters, Rizvi outlined his vision of governance according the Barelvi branch of Islam, of which he is a prominent cleric. Frequently citing Koranic verses and Pakistani history, he said his party could solve corruption problems in a day through stricter adherence to sharia, or Islamic law. Sharia will have to be enforced. No one should be worried about it, he said, sitting in the upper room of a Lahore mosque surrounded by followers, many who had adopted Qadri s signature look of long hair and kohl-lined eyes. He acknowledged his vision would mean some changes to daily life, giving the example of barring women from working as airline flight attendants. In its party platform, Tehrik-e-Labaik Pakistan calls for free education, free healthcare and social justice. But it is best known for its public and passionate support for Mumtaz Qadri | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3230 | 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: Certainly, the IRS requested that taxpayers report stolen goods and illicit earnings. Claim summaries: But there's a loophole to get out of declaring on stolen goods.
contextual information: Criminals, beware. Just because you got away with an illegal activity doesn't mean the IRS isn't going to come after your earnings. Just ahead of the 2021 tax season, the IRS released guidelines requiring taxpayers to claim items they have stolen, as well as earnings from illegal activities. The claim made headlines in publications that joked potential criminals were running out of time to return stolen goods to avoid paying taxes on them. It went viral when the financial Twitter account @litquidity took to social media to remind taxpayers that tax season is around the corner. And it's true. Publication 17, which contains the IRS's general rules for filing federal income tax returns, lists illegal activities under "other income," categorized as self-employment activity, which must be reported to the federal tax agency. "Income from illegal activities, such as money from dealing illegal drugs, must be included in your income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from your self-employment activity," read the 2021 IRS guidelines. The guidelines also require that those who steal property must report the fair market value as income in the year that the item was stolen. Of course, one can avoid paying taxes on such items as long as the person returns them to the individual they were stolen from in the first place. The handy regulations also list how to report embezzled funds, note that bribes are considered nondeductible expenses, and state that kickbacks, side commissions, and push money must also be included in Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 8z, or on Schedule C (Form 1040) if from self-employment activity. It's not just items or earnings obtained through illegal activities. That watch you found in the gym locker room? Yep, it's taxable. If you find and keep property that doesn't belong to you and has been lost or abandoned (treasure trove), it's taxable to you at its fair market value in the first year of your undisputed possession, noted the IRS. Snopes spoke with an accountant who said that while the reporting requirements themselves aren't new, there was previously a separate form specifically for reporting illegal activity income. It's unclear to what extent people actually used the form in the past. It's not exactly clear whether law enforcement will be given information about individuals who report income from illegal activities. What is clear is that anyone under the age of 65 who made more than $12,550 in 2021 is required to file by April 18, 2022. Sources: Dolan, Debra. "Time Is Running Out to Return Stolen Goods to Avoid Paying Taxes on Them." https://www.wdbj7.com, https://www.wdbj7.com/2021/12/29/time-is-running-out-return-stolen-goods-avoid-paying-taxes-them/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. "IRS Asks That Criminals Provide Its Cut of Stolen Property, Illegal Income." KXXV, 29 Dec. 2021, https://www.kxxv.com/news/local-news/irs-asks-that-criminals-provide-its-cut-of-stolen-property-illegal-income. "Publication 17 (2021), Your Federal Income Tax | Internal Revenue Service." https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. "Stole Something? IRS Says Stolen Property and Bribes Must Be Reported as Income." USA Today, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/12/28/irs-says-stolen-property-must-reported-and-twitter-goes-wild/9035694002/. Accessed 30 Dec. 2021. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3231 | 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 Refer to 'China Virus' on Fox the Night Asian Women Were Killed in Atlanta? Claim summaries: The former president had called into Fox on March 16 to talk about issues unrelated to the Atlanta-area mass shooting.
contextual information: Around 5 p.m. EDT on March 16, 2021, a 21-year-old white man allegedly shot and killed eight people—six of whom were Asian women—at three Atlanta-area spas. As of this report, the investigation into the mass shooting remains ongoing. As word of the tragedy spread online, people flooded social media with messages of sympathy for the deceased. Many posts classified them as unknowing victims of the country's increasing xenophobia, given a surge of attacks against Asian Americans that coincided with the COVID-19 outbreak in the U.S., as well as pervasive violence against women. Among those posting was Aaron Rupar, a journalist at Vox. A couple of hours after the incident, for instance, he blamed former U.S. President Donald Trump's characterization of the coronavirus for the growing hate crimes against Asian Americans and tweeted: "[I] don't think it's a coincidence that Trump spent the better part of a year using a virus as a slur against Chinese people while hate crimes against Asian Americans spiked by 150 percent." Rupar was referring to Trump's repeated insistence on calling the coronavirus the "Chinese virus," which goes against widely accepted public health guidelines that warn against titling disease outbreaks after nations or regions to eliminate stigmatization, as well as 2020 hate crime statistics in 16 U.S. cities compiled by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University. About 20 minutes later, Rupar added: As authorities in the Atlanta area embarked on a manhunt to catch the suspect on the evening of March 16, Trump referred to the coronavirus as the "China virus" on Fox News. But let this be clear: No evidence explicitly connected the former president's use of the term on national television with the tragedy unfolding simultaneously in Georgia. Furthermore, it was unclear whether he was even aware of the mass shooting when he said "China virus" while discussing unrelated matters—specifically, his presidential administration's approach to the American economy. The interviewer did not ask him about the Atlanta-area shooting. Here's what happened: Between roughly 6 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. EDT, according to The Associated Press, the victims' bodies were reported inside massage parlors, and authorities arrested the suspected gunman—Robert Aaron Long, of Woodstock, Georgia—as he was driving on the interstate. Meanwhile, at 7 p.m. EDT, Trump called in for a phone interview with Fox News' Maria Bartiromo, a recording of which Snopes obtained via the media outlet's website and is displayed below. Throughout much of the interview, the former president lambasted his successor's approach to immigration, criticized election security, and took credit for the ongoing efforts to provide COVID-19 vaccinations to every American willing to get one. Then, at approximately the 5-minute mark, he said: "[The economy] was recovering under my administration—twice. We got it to a level that the world has never seen before. We were the envy of the world, and then when we got hit by the, as I call it, 'the China virus'—COVID—it obviously went down along with every other economy. And then we were the first to get it back up." | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3232 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Mike Pence tweeted about how he was looking forward to attending a Colts game with his wife Karen today. His excitement was quickly extinguished, however, by the unpatriotic behavior of the Indianapolis Colts, who ve put their social justice causes before honoring our flag and our great nation.Looking forward to cheering for our @Colts & honoring the great career of #18 Peyton Manning at @LucasOilStadium today. Go Colts! pic.twitter.com/C3aCYUNpqG Vice President Pence (@VP) October 8, 2017Vice President Mike Pence and his wife Karen left Sunday s Indianapolis Colts game against the San Francisco 49 ers after several players on the 49 ers team reportedly took a knee during the national anthem.Immediately following the national anthem, Pence tweeted: I left today s Colts game because @POTUS and I will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem. I left today's Colts game because @POTUS and I will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem. Vice President Pence (@VP) October 8, 2017Pence later tweeted, At a time when so many Americans are inspiring our nation with their courage, resolve and resilience, now more than ever, we should rally around our Flag and everything that unites us. now, more than ever, we should rally around our Flag and everything that unites us Vice President Pence (@VP) October 8, 2017Vice President Pence was quick to defend the players right to free-speech but suggested that he doesn t think it s too much to ask NFL players to respect the Flag and our National Anthem.While everyone is entitled to their own opinions, I don't think it's too much to ask NFL players to respect the Flag and our National Anthem Vice President Pence (@VP) October 8, 2017Finally, Vice President Pence tweeted a picture of he and his wife Karen standing proudly for our national anthem from the stands of the Colts Lucas Oil Arena:We were proud to stand with all our @Colts for our soldiers, our flag, and our National Anthem pic.twitter.com/mkZiKMkPDD Vice President Pence (@VP) October 8, 2017It looks like VP Pence and President Trump are not alone in their opinions about the NFL players who continue to disrespect our flag. Public opinion about the NFL and its players has taken a huge hit since President Trump tweeted about his disgust for the lack of respect the players have shown for our flag. NFL ratings continue to be in the basement.Sporting News The alarming fall in NFL TV ratings this season is partly because of fan anger over on-field protests by Colin Kaepernick and other players of the American flag/national anthem, according to pollster Rasmussen Reports.Nearly one-third (32 percent) of adults say they re less likely to watch NFL game telecasts because of the Kaepernick-led player protests against racial injustice, according to Rasmussen s telephone/online survey of 1,000 American adults conducted Oct. 2-3.Only 13 percent said they were more likely to watch an NFL game because of continuing protests by Kaepernick and supporters such as Antonio Cromartie of the Colts (who was cut only two days after raising a fist during the playing of The Star-Spangled Banner in London on Sunday). | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3233 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Elon Musk to Completely Revolutionize the Energy Industry with New Tesla Solar Roof Home / BREAKING NEWS / New Clinton Probe Dead from the Start, John Podesta’s Best Friend at DOJ In Charge of Investigation New Clinton Probe Dead from the Start, John Podesta’s Best Friend at DOJ In Charge of Investigation Claire Bernish November 1, 2016 Leave a comment
Late on Friday evening, the FBI announced the reopening of its investigation of Hillary Clinton and her opprobrious emails, and the Department of Justice quickly followed suit on Monday, vowing to “dedicate all needed resources to quickly review emails in [the] Clinton case,” according to a tweet by the Associated Press . BREAKING: Justice Dept. says it'll dedicate all needed resources to quickly review emails in Clinton case.
— The Associated Press (@AP) October 31, 2016
Both announcements, made after Clinton aid Huma Abedin’s emails were discovered on estranged husband Anthony Weiner’s computer, come amid growing internal contention, as the FBI and DOJ parse out how to deal with the pressure of a rapidly approaching presidential election, as well as public perception the original investigation had been purposely bumbled in favor of the Democratic nominee.
However welcome or unwelcome the news of reopened investigations might be, one major detail — revealed in Wikileaks ongoing publications of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s emails — presents evidence the Justice Department’s probe could amount to little more than a smoke screen to placate an irate public.
Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik promised Congress in a letter the Justice Department “will continue to work closely with the FBI and together, dedicate all necessary resources and take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible.” #BREAKING Senior DOJ official sends letter to lawmakers responding to request for more information about email review. #8days pic.twitter.com/PCgT2ODkQd
— Just the Facts (@JTF_News) October 31, 2016
Perhaps that vow, from a government branch putatively dedicated to ensuring the criminal element is duly punished for misbehavior, should reassure those increasingly suspicious of an obviously-rigged system.
Perhaps, before Wikileaks revealed interdepartmental communications and corruption, that promise might have held weight beyond a symbolic gesture of obligation — but as Podesta’s emails reveal, it’s entirely possible this reopened investigation is failed from the start.
Kadzik, in fact, maintains a cozy enough relationship with Podesta to have had dinner with the Clinton insider just one day after the former secretary of state testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi last October.
And the pair’s familiarity isn’t held to a simple dinner party, as the Daily Caller reported , “Podesta and Kadzik, the assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, were in frequent contact, other emails show. In one email from January, Kadzik and Podesta, who were classmates at Georgetown Law School in the 1970s, discussed plans to celebrate Podesta’s birthday. And in another sent last May, Kadzik’s son emailed Podesta asking for a job on the Clinton campaign.”
So, Kadzik — an extremely close friend to the chair of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign — is tasked with heading the newly reopened investigation of Hillary Clinton.
Clinton couldn’t ask for an arrangement better situated to again find insufficient evidence worthy of bringing charges against her. As far as conflicts of interest go, this takes the cake.
“The political appointees in the Obama administration, especially in the Department of Justice, appear to be very partisan in nature and I don’t think had clean hands when it comes to the investigation of the private email server,” executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, Matthew Whitaker, told the Daily Caller .
If political wranglings and connections marred transparency and neutrality the first time around, it would be reasonable to assume the players haven’t since magically unentangled themselves from Clinton and her campaign mere days before Americans take to the polls.
“It’s the kind of thing the American people are frustrated about is that the politically powerful have insider access and have these kind of relationships that ultimately appear to always break to the benefit of Hillary Clinton,” Whitaker continued, also noting the controversial meeting between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on an airport tarmac in Phoenix during the DOJ’s previous investigation.
In fact, Kadzik, as an Obama appointee to the Justice Department beginning in 2013, also initiated the effort to have Loretta Lynch appointed to the role of Attorney General.
And the friendship between Kadzik and Podesta — as well as their connections to the Obama administration and additional officials overseeing the Clinton investigation — spans decades.
In 2008, for example, as the Washington Free Beacon reported from one of the leaked emails, Podesta emailed an Obama campaign official to recommend Kadzik have a supportive role in Obama’s presidential campaign — particularly because the latter was a “fantastic lawyer” who managed to keep Podesta “out of jail.”
Although Kadzik, as head of the Office of Legislative Affairs, does not have a direct role in ‘chain of command’ for the Clinton investigation, he does field inquiries from Congress concerning her emails.
Noted by the Daily Caller , in “November, he denied a request from Republican lawmakers to appoint a special counsel to lead the investigation,” which sparked outrage by the GOP over potential conflicts of interest.
Florida Rep. Ron DeSantis voiced particular concerns about Lynch’s longtime connections to the Clintons in a February 1, 2016 letter , and that Obama’s appointees “are being asked to impartially execute their respective duties as Department of Justice officials that may involve an investigation into the activities of the forerunner for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.”
While the Daily Caller ’s report goes much further in depth concerning the relationships of Podesta and Kadzik with the Clintons and their insiders, it can be easily surmised in even a simple perusal of facts there could be no possible way an investigation this critical — and with resounding implications — would maintain any semblance of impartiality.
When Julian Assange vociferously denounces the U.S. electoral and political systems as rigged beyond repair, these connections are precisely what he’s referring to.
It might calm an irate public to hear an investigation had to be reopened — but when the effort involves the same players as the first round, the outcome is all-too predictable. Share Social Trending | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3234 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Owned by Unilever, the Axe brand includes a range of men's grooming products with many of the ingredients never even tested for safety according to the C.I.R. – Cosmetic Ingredient Review. Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Axe products are loaded with endocrine disrupting chemicals. Endocrine disruptorsare exogenous, synthetic chemicals that have hormone-like effects on both humans and wild-life and interfere with the endocrine system by either mimicking or blocking our natural hormones and disrupting their respective body functions. Member scientists of the Endocrine Society issued a report in which they claim: “We present the evidence that endocrine disruptors have effects on male and female reproduction, breast development and cancer, prostrate cancer, neuroendocrinology, thyroid, metabolism and obesity, and cardiovascular endocrinology.” New studies are also revealing that these harmful chemicals may be causing physical feminization in males. A study published by the International Journal of Andrology found that feminization of boys can now be seen through their play habits. Medical experts are now wondering whether exposure to years of these toxic chemicals is part of the reason so many older men are low on testosterone and experiencing erectile dysfunction. So they take a little blue pill and get exposed to even more chemicals and the cycle continues. Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly Aluminum zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly is the active ingredient in Axe deodorant products. One or more animal studies show kidney or renal system effects at very low doses, mammalian cells show positive mutation results, animal studies show reproductive effects at moderate doses. Aluminum was first recognized as a human neurotoxin in 1886, before being used as an antiperspirant. A neurotoxin is a substance that causes damage to nerves or nerve tissue. Cocamidopropyl Betaine Cocamidopropyl betaine is a very toxic ingredient which has been linked to cancer in animal tests. The biggest danger of using a product with cocamidopropyl betaine is its potential contamination with nitrosamines. Nitrosamines are created when nitrosating agents are combined with amines. Nitrosamines have been identified as one of the most potent classes of carcinogens, having caused cancer in more than 40 different animal species as well as in humans. PPG-14 Butyl Ether PPG stands for popypropylene glycol, which is made from a completely artificial petroleum product, methyl oxirane. Another name for that is propylene oxide (which is a probable human carcinogen). Propylene oxide is also an irritant and highly flammable. Butyl ethers are in the paraben family, and they are toluene derivatives (toxic petrochemical compounds). Toluene has proven to have a harmful affect on the reproductive system while parabens have been linked to cancer. PEG-8 Distearate According to a report in the International Journal of Toxicology by the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) committee, impurities found in various PEG compounds include ethylene oxide; 1,4-dioxane; polycyclic aromatic compounds; and heavy metals such as lead, iron, cobalt, nickel, cadmium, and arsenic. Many of these impurities are linked to cancer. A 1988 Swedish study by Thompson looked at both BHT and BHA. They found that both were toxic and tumour promoting. Both antioxidants were observed to be cytotoxic in a concentration-dependent manner at concentrations ranging from 100 to 750 microM. At equimolar concentrations BHT was more cytotoxic than BHA. Related: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3235 | 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 41 Senators 'Vote to Let Babies Scream Until They Die If Born Alive'? Claim summaries: U.S. Senate Bill 311 provoked widely shared social media posts that targeted Democratic and Independent senators in 2020.
contextual information: In the summer of 2020, Snopes readers asked us to look into the accuracy of social media posts that claimed to list the names of 41 U.S. Senators who had "voted to let babies scream until they die if born alive." social media posts The meme referred to Senate Bill 311 (SB 311), which was introduced in the Senate in January 2019 by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb. The non-partisan Congressional Research Service summary of the legislation reads as follows: summary This bill establishes requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must exercise in the event a child is born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion. A health care practitioner who is present must (1) exercise the same degree of care as reasonably provided to another child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) immediately admit the child to a hospital. The bill also requires a health care practitioner or other employee to immediately report any failure to comply with this requirement to law enforcement. A person who violates the requirements is subject to criminal penalties a fine, up to five years in prison, or both. Additionally, an individual who intentionally kills or attempts to kill a child born alive is subject to prosecution for murder. The bill bars the criminal prosecution of a mother of a child born alive for conspiracy to violate these provisions, for being an accessory after the fact, or for concealment of felony. A woman who undergoes an abortion or attempted abortion may file a civil action for damages against an individual who violates this bill. The text of SB 311 can be read in full here. It's true that Democratic and Independent senators did vote to block that bill's progress, but the above-displayed Facebook meme leaves out crucial context federal and state laws already provide protections for babies born alive after abortions and obscure the stated reasons for those votes, an essential component of any evaluation of a legislative vote. Overall, we rate the meme's core claim as "false." here The proposed "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act" has been stuck in the Senate since February 2019, despite efforts by Republicans to revive it in February 2020. The bill has not been forwarded to any Senate committee, and Republicans have failed on two occasions to obtain the votes necessary to advance the legislation through the Senate. Those two votes, in February 2019 and February 2020, were on motions of cloture. A motion of cloture is, roughly speaking, a proposal signed by at least 16 senators to close debate on a particular bill. At first glance, that might suggest that those in favor of the cloture motion are opposed to the content of the legislation itself, but in fact, "invoking cloture" is a way to advance a bill's progress in the Senate by pushing through the debate stage and arriving at a full-Senate vote on the legislation itself. Cloture is a key mechanism for breaking a filibuster in the Senate. February 2019 February 2020 motion of cloture filibuster On most matters, a cloture motion must be agreed to by 60% of senators, which usually means 60 votes (except in cases where a Senate seat is temporarily vacant). In the 2019 vote, only 53 members voted "Yea," and in 2020 that number was 56 below the 60-vote threshold on each occasion. It's worth noting that the Senate has not yet voted on whether to pass SB 311 itself, so a vote in favor of a motion for cloture should not be conflated with a vote in favor of the substance of the legislation. However, it is reasonable to assume, in general, that senators who voted to push SB 311 through to the next stage towards enactment were also in favor of enacting the bill itself, and those who voted against the cloture motions were doing so in order to halt the legislation's progress because they opposed its contents. This assumption is borne out in the partisan contours of the 2019 and 2020 cloture votes: On both occasions, no Republican voted against the motion, and only Democrats voted against it (including Independent Sens. Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who both caucus with the Democrats). On both occasions, three Democrats crossed the floor and voted in favor of the cloture motions: Sens. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones of Alabama. 2019 2020 The exact claim in the Facebook meme is somewhat confusing. The caption refers to 41 senators, but the list contains 44 names. In February 2019, all 44 of the senators listed in the meme voted against the Republican cloture motion. However, in February 2020, 41 of them voted against the cloture motion, with the remaining three not voting (Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Sanders). So it's not clear to which vote the meme refers. However, on each occasion the wording of the cloture motion and the question put to senators was identical, so the distinction is only a formal one. was identical In evaluating whether the Democratic senators listed in the meme did, in fact, "vote to let babies scream until they die if born alive," it is necessary to assess the reasons for their votes against cloture motions and the effect of the failure of the cloture motions. It hardly needs to be said, but neither the bill itself, nor any statements made by the Democratic senators who opposed it, contained any mention of "babies screaming until they die." So in voting against the progress of SB 311, no senator was explicitly voting in order to bring about that outcome, in those terms. Rather, that phrase was a characterization of the effect of the votes, which originated from the creator of the Facebook meme. By voting against the cloture motions, the senators halted the progress of a bill that, if enacted, would mean that federal law required health care practitioners to provide the same life-saving treatments and interventions for a baby born alive after a failed abortion (including admitting the baby to a hospital) as they are currently required to provide to babies born alive under other circumstances. The bill would also mean that health care practitioners would be required, under federal law, to report to law enforcement if they became aware that someone else had violated those requirements. Any health practitioner convicted of failing to fulfill those requirements, or failing to report someone else's violation, would be liable to be fined and/or imprisoned for up to five years. SB 311 would also mean that a person found to have intentionally killed a baby born alive after a failed abortion would be liable to conviction and punishment under the federal prohibition against murder. prohibition Does this mean that by preventing the passage of SB 311 Democratic senators were allowing health care practitioners to lawfully let babies die, without rendering aid, if they are born alive after a failed abortion? Not really. Federal law already explicitly states that babies born alive, regardless of the circumstances, are human persons and should be treated as such in the context of criminal law. The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush in 2002. It states that: states (a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words person, human being, child, and individual, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development. As used in this section, the term born alive", with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion. This means that intentionally killing a baby born alive can be, and is, prosecuted as murder, since the baby is defined under the 2002 act as a human person. In principle, it also means that doctors and nurses have the same professional, legal, and ethical responsibility to babies born alive after failed abortions as they do to babies born alive in other circumstances. The 2002 law does not include an explicit, affirmative duty of care for health care practitioners and does not stipulate any penalties for failing to provide appropriate care. However, many individual states do. Based on research originally published by the anti-abortion Family Research Council, Snopes checked legislation in all 50 states and found that, as of Aug. 20, 2020, 34 states have laws that explicitly either: affirm the equal right to medical care of a baby born alive after an abortion; or assert an affirmative legal obligation for medical practitioners to provide care; or set out criminal penalties for failing to provide care; or all of the above provisions. A full list of each state's "born alive" abortion laws, including links to the original legislation, can be found here. published here (Note: At the time of the first cloture vote in February 2019, the number of states with "born alive" abortion laws was 33. West Virginia's Senate passed the state's own Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Feb. 10, 2020, and Gov. Jim Justice signed it into law on March 2, 2020. By the time the U.S. Senate had its second cloture motion on Feb. 25, 2020, Justice had already vowed to sign the West Virginia law, meaning the number of states with "born alive" abortion laws was imminently about to become 34.) passed signed vowed The effect of the decision to block the progress of SB 311 through the U.S. Senate was to preserve the legal status quo around the country, namely that: two-thirds of states already had laws offering various levels of protection for babies born alive after failed abortions, and various levels of criminal penalties set out for health care practitioners who fail to provide care for them; and that federal law already recognized that babies born alive after failed abortions should be treated as human persons in the context of criminal law. This significantly undermines the Facebook meme's claim that the 44 senators had voted to allow babies to be left to die if they are born alive after a failed abortion, because that it isn't the case in most states. However, passing SB 311 would mean that there would be no ambiguity about the criminal implications and consequences of the 2002 law. Under SB 311, federal law would unequivocally set out a legal duty of care and a reporting obligation for health care professionals, as well as specific criminal penalties. While the 2002 law empowered states to enact their own "born alive" abortion laws, and 34 states have opted to do just that, 16 states have not, and SB 311 would introduce a "born alive" abortion law that would apply uniformly throughout the entire country. By voting to block the progress of SB 311, the Democratic and Independent senators did undoubtedly prevent that outcome from becoming much more likely. In evaluating whether voting against the cloture motions on SB 311 meant the 44 senators were voting to allow babies born alive after abortion to simply die without medical aid, it is also necessary to examine the reasons why the senators voted the way they did. In general, the Democratic senators who gave statements about their votes on SB 311 said that they had opposed the passage of the bill because they felt it was unnecessary in light of existing law and because they felt it inappropriately criminalized health care practitioners and interfered in the doctor-patient relationship. None said they had voted against the cloture motions in order to allow babies to be left to die or expressed indifference about that outcome. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, for example, wrote, "We should not unnecessarily create new federal crimes and penalties to punish behavior that is already illegal under existing state and federal laws." Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland wrote, "It has always been illegal to kill or harm a newborn infant, and this bill had nothing to do with that. Instead, this bill would have subjected medical professionals to unprecedented criminal liability and inappropriately comes between a woman and her doctor. wrote wrote Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii said SB 311 was "a solution in search of a problem," adding, "Contrary to what the proponents of this bill argue, it is and has always been a crime to harm or kill newborn babies. And people guilty of this crime can already be charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." said Speaking from the floor of the Senate, Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois emphasized the fact that abortions that take place late enough for a fetus to show vital signs overwhelmingly occur in the context of a late diagnosis of a fetal abnormality that will, in short order, prove fatal. She stated that her reason for opposing SB 311 was that it would exacerbate the suffering of parents in such scenarios and force health care practitioners to attempt medical interventions that they know to be futile. stated ... Imagine the heartbreak of going to the doctor one day and learning that theres no chance your baby will survive that theres no hope your baby girl will ever speak her first word or take her first step Or that delivering her would put your own life at risk, leaving your firstborn to grow up without a mother. These are the types of scenarios that lead to the heart-wrenching decision to terminate a pregnancy later on. As the mom of two little girls, I cant begin to fathom that kind of pain. And yet today, some on the other side of the aisle are trying to use those parents' suffering for political advantage making worst-case scenarios like these all the more difficult by pushing a bill aimed to criminalize reproductive care no matter the cost. If it becomes law, this bill would force doctors to perform ineffective, invasive procedures on fetuses born with fatal abnormalities even if its against the best interests of the child. Even if it goes against recommended standards of care and they know it wouldnt extend or improve the babys life. Even if it would prolong the suffering of the families forcing women to endure added lasting trauma ... making one of the worst moments in their lives somehow even more painful. If physicians refuse, theyd be punished ... sentenced to up to five years in prison. In February 2019, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Nurse-Midwives co-signed a letter to U.S. Senators, urging them to vote against SB 311 for similar reasons to those given by Duckworth and others, writing: letter "It [S. 311] injects politicians into the patient-provider relationship, disregarding providers training and clinical judgment and undermining their ability to determine the best course of action with their patients." Late-term abortions are exceedingly rare. In 2016, the most recent year for which data was available, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that just 1.2% of abortions took place after 21 weeks' gestational age. reported Deaths involving babies born alive after an abortion are even rarer. According to CDC data, just 143 newborn deaths were recorded as resulting from spontaneous or induced terminations of pregnancy between 2003 and 2014, a period during which more than 49 million live births took place. The CDC advised that the figure of 143 might be an understatement, but also stated that two-thirds of those newborn deaths involved a "maternal complication or one or more congenital anomalies," which corroborates the claims of Duckworth and others. data Sasse, Ben. "S. 311 -- Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act."
U.S. Senate. 31 January 2019. Davis, Christopher M. "Invoking Cloture in the Senate."
Congressional Research Service. 6 April 2017. Congressional Research Service. "Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate."
7 April 2017. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. "U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 51, Section 1111 -- Murder."
Accessed 20 August 2020. Chabot, Steve. "H.R. 2175 -- Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002."
U.S. House of Representatives. 5 August 2002. Family Research Council. "Pro-Life Laws in the States -- Born-Alive Protections."
Accessed 20 August 2020. PBS/The Associated Press. "West Virginia Senate Passes 'Born Alive' Abortion Bill."
10 February 2020. Justice, Jim. "Governor Speaks on 'Protecting Abortion Survivors.'"
The Point Pleasant Register. 14 February 2020. Kaine, Tim. "Kaine Statement on S. 311."
25 February 2020. Cardin, Ben. "Cardin Statement on the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act."
26 February 2019. Hirono, Mazie. "Hirono, Murray, and Colleagues Denounce Latest Republican Attack on a Womans Right to Choose in Remarks on the Senate Floor"
25 February 2019. Duckworth, Tammy. "Minutes Before Vote, Duckworth Pushes Senate to Reject Latest Anti-Choice, Anti-Doctor GOP Bill."
25 February 2019. Jatlaoui, Tara et al. "Abortion Surveillance -- United States, 2016."
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 29 November 2019. National Center for Health Statistics. "Mortality Records with Mention of International Classification of Diseases-10 code P96.4 (Termination of Pregnancy): United States, 2003-2014."
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 11 April 2016. Robertson, Lori. "The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate."
Factcheck.org. 4 March 2019. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3236 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: It s like a day doesn t go by without some backwoods, right-wing jackass threatening the life of the President.Donald Baker of the Anchorage Fire Department was suspended after issuing threats to the President on social media. The controversy began when a reader sent a screenshot of the remark to WHAS11. Under an article titled Obama Hijacks Memorial With Sick Message (apparently from right-wing garbage pile America s Freedom Fighters), Baker wrote that someone should please put a bullet in this f*cker s head, referring to worthless piece of sh*t Obama:When the station contacted Baker s employer, an investigation was launched. Chief William Rockwood confirmed on Thursday that the post was being investigated, and that he had suspended Baker while he determines if the department s social media policy was violated by this direct threat to the President: The Anchorage Fire Protection District finds this post extremely troubling and inappropriate. The District does not condone or allow the use of inappropriate conduct or language by its employees in person or through instant technology. Sadly, Baker is finding a lot of support on WHAS11 s Facebook page: Some of his more vocal supporters have their own thoughts on the President: Perhaps it s time for the Secret Service to pay Mr. Baker a visit. All too often we see threats against the President go completely unanswered a dangerous thing when right-wing terrorism is on the rise.At minimum, Baker should definitely lose his job. After all, can he really be trusted to do his job to the best of his ability if he pulls up to a fire at a house with Democratic political signs in the yard? How deep does his bigotry go? Does it extend to all African-Americans? We are still awaiting the results of the investigation, but hopefully the Department does the right thing. Free speech is important, but it can and does have consequences.Featured image via screengrab | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3237 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 52 Views October 31, 2016 GOLD , KWN King World News
With most markets on lockdown on Halloween trading day, here is a big picture view of where the world is headed.
Stephen Leeb: “This past week a New York Times headline that caught my eye was: “At Heart of U.S. Strategy; Weapons That Can Think.” The gist was that over the next few years the U.S. will be spending billions of dollars to make “smart” weapons, while also boosting our cyber budget by billions of dollars. It struck me as another example of how anytime we in the U.S. pound our chest about our mighty military, we always point to how much money have spent and plan to spend… IMPORTANT: To hear which legend just spoke with KWN about $8,000 gold and the coming mania in the gold, silver, and mining shares markets CLICK HERE OR ON THE IMAGE BELOW.
In a recent issue of Foreign Affairs, Michael O’Harlan and David Petraeus, men with exceptional military pedigrees, declare: “U.S. forces have few, if any, weaknesses and in many areas…they play in a totally different league from the militaries of other countries…Nor is this likely to change anytime soon, as U.S. defense spending is almost three times as large as that of the United States’ closest competitor, China.”
Reassuring words? Maybe for a moment. But as soon as you think about it, they become anything but reassuring, showing that even when it comes to our most vital security issues, we make the fundamentally flawed assumption that money equates to wealth.
I’ve long been convinced that if the U.S. continues on what appears an ever more inevitable slide, historians will point to the day Nixon dropped the gold standard as launching that skid. Gold is wealth; paper is merely money. Money can facilitate the exchange of wealth, but by itself it is just paper or entries on a computer ledger and a very poor substitute for wealth. Commodities are wealth, and many vital commodities, as we pointed in a recent interview, can’t even be purchased any more – period. Information is also wealth. And no amount of money can guarantee an edge in information.
A few weeks ago, a 15- or 16-year-old who had recently become interested in chess wrote a letter to a chess blog asking how much he’d need to spend to become a Grand Master – how much for training, how much for practice time, coaches, etc. The only possible answer: not all the money in the world could turn a novice who’s already a teenager into a world-class player. Grand masters have a wealth of knowledge and savvy that can’t be acquired once you’re much past 7 or 8 years old. You’ve missed the boat.
Similarly, no amount of money enabled U.S. experts to crack the cell phone of the San Bernardino terrorists. But cyber experts from Israel, which spends a lot less on cyber issues, cracked it with relative ease. Israel, along with China and Russia, are among a number of countries, mostly located in Asia, that develop the skills of their gifted children at early ages. This has left the U.S. a poor second in critical areas ranging from cyber security to super computers, which will be the most essential tools in the next generation of a gold-centered monetary system.
Even nonbelievers should be starting to perceive the inevitability of gold replacing paper. A few metrics tell the story. First is the relationship between the dollar and economic growth. Despite the recent report of better-than-expected third-quarter GDP, the economy’s growth has been declining as the dollar has risen. In the wake of the Great Recession the dollar traded in a fairly tight range, while GDP growth in fits and starts peaked at 5 percent in the third quarter of 2014. The higher dollar has held GDP growth to less than 2 percent for the past two years.
But commodities have begun to rise. Most major commodity indexes have climbed 10 percent or more this year. Even the temporary setback in obtaining an OPEC agreement won’t hold back real goods. Recently, for the first time since China announced its Silk Road initiative in 2013, a major article on the undertaking appeared in a major magazine, Foreign Affairs. Gal Luft , a senior advisor to the United States Energy Security Council, urged Washington to get aboard or lose out on the chance to benefit from the greatest infrastructure project in the history of civilization, many times the size of the Marshall Plan and already the destination of $1 trillion in Chinese exports this year, with dramatic growth likely for the foreseeable future.
But instead we’re likely to continue to use our dollars in ways that bear ever less connection to real wealth. Bear in mind that any effort to hold inflation down will crumble in the face of Western economies even weaker than ours. The result is that real interest rates will remain negative, an unalloyed positive for gold. At the same time the currency used along the Silk Road will be some combination of gold, the SDR, and the yuan. As we have said before, China’s edge in critical information technologies ensures its domination in virtual currencies such as the bitcoin, which will have multiple advantages in tomorrow’s gold-based world.
How High Will Gold & Silver Trade? How high will gold go? Much depends on how much trade the Silk Road generates. Which means that if think gold could go to five digits, you don’t need a shrink – you’re sane as can be. And let’s not overlook gold’s poor cousin, which in the end could make you even richer, silver. The energies of our future will be anchored to solar, nuclear, and wind. The solar anchor will mean that already peaking silver will become some of the scarcest wealth around. If you’re dreaming of $100 silver, your dreams will be coming true before long.
To me it’s an ironic footnote to the Nixon years. Yes, history will record that America’s decline began when the much-maligned Nixon delinked the dollar from gold and let us conflate money and wealth. Meanwhile, though, you can make a fortune on the coming bull market in gold that will be the direct result of that decision.”
The Coming Super Depression, Cyberwars, $10,000 Gold & $1,000 Silver CLICK | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3238 | 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: I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today.
contextual information: A big part of the mayoral campaign of Paul Vallas relies on his six-year record as CEO of the Chicago Public Schools under former Mayor Richard Daley. And the theme that Vallas often falls back on is that he was a turnaround specialist who revived a very troubled school system and left it in better financial and academic shape than he found it. I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today, Vallas declared in a New Years Eve interviewon WGN radio. Ive always been a problem-solver. My approach has always been to go in, bring financial stability to the systems that Ive taken responsibility for, design budgets that are long-term financial plans that actually invest in the community to generate growth. Vallas is facing a crowded field of contenders in next months city elections to replace the retiring Rahm Emanuel as mayor, and the flagging condition of the citys public schools will be sure to present a major test for whichever candidate prevails. Having a proven track record as a school fix-it specialist could be a big plus for Vallas. But how valid are his claims? We decided to take a look. Vallas claims raise two questions. First, whether his basic facts check out. Second, whether they can be credited to his leadership. News clips and columns from the Vallas era at CPS, which began in 1995, back up the first beat of his claim. They note that district leaders had projected before he took over that CPS was on track to run a deficit of more than $1 billion by 1999. Under Vallas, that huge deficit never materialized, and district financial records he pointed to show that by his last year at the helm in 2001 CPS claimed a positive balance of nearly $1 billion in all of its financial accounts. But can Vallas credit his policy decisions entirely for that transformation? Not exactly. In 1995, lawmakers in Springfield turned over control of the district, which was facing one of many financial crises, to Mayor Richard M. Daley. He named Vallas, who had been serving as his budget director, chief executive officer. Daley also appointed Gery Chico, now a mayoral opponent of Vallas, as school board president. But the new guard at CPS also got to play by a different set of financial rules. Instead of receiving state aid earmarked for specific purposes, for example, the district started getting a significant amount of funding in the form of a block grant. Another big change that helped un-tie its fiscal hands: Lawmakers allowed property tax dollars, which had previously flowed directly into the pension fund for teachers, to go to CPS instead. And in 1997, legislators permitted the district to forego payments into the pension fund provided it hit benchmarks signifying sound fiscal health. He was not operating under the same conditions as the CEO that existed prior to 1995, said Amanda Kass, associate director of the Government Finance Research Center at the University of Illinois-Chicago. During Vallas six years with the district, and for several years following his tenure, CPS paid next to nothing toward teacher pension costs. The Vallas era at CPS coincided with the dot.com bubble that sent markets soaring, helping the pension fund stay healthy even without the annual injections of cash it began missing out on. Had Springfield not changed the law, the CPS teacher pension fund would have been paid$90millionin 1995 to cover the employer share of pension costs that year. Instead, it got $10 million. Over the next decade, the fund was out$2billion. We asked Vallas in a phone interview why he opted to stop pension payments. The system was earning such strong returns, it didnt require that we make contributions during those few years, he explained. Kass said its considered best practice for local governments to continue employer share contributions regardless of the financial health of pension funds something the 1997 law did not require. Had CPS continued contributions during the Vallas years, the pension fund would have had more cushion to weather the financial recessions that hit in 2001 and again in 2008, she explained. That said, Kass added that her observations come with the benefit of hindsight after watching the pension fund balance worsen dramatically after Vallas left and his successors continued to put off payments even as the funds fiscal viability declined. I do think that Vallas inherited a challenging situation, Kass said, noting that ratings of CPS bonds improved significantly during his tenure and enabled a system all but shut out of the credit markets to begin borrowing again. In short, CPS was on the financial ropes before Vallas took over but made significant fiscal strides under him. Changes in state law, however, gave him far more financial flexibility to operate than his predecessors. In touting his success as CEO, Vallas also pointed to the size of the district under his watch compared with much-diminished enrollment figures of today. Enrollment is important as a symbol of how attractive CPS is to families of school age children, but it also carries real financial weight because the fewer students attending classes the less state aid the district gets. Vallas numbers are roughly accurate. CPS enrollment stood at nearly 425,000 when he left the district, but now sits at about 361,000,stateandCPS figuresshow. But in using enrollment data as a measuring stick of his success, Vallas ignores significant demographic changes in the city since his time at CPS that render such a comparison misleading. Chicago saw a period of population growth in the 1990s due in large part to a substantial increase in immigrants, largely from Mexico. With that increase in immigration came an influx of students into CPS, said Chicago demographer Rob Paral. The stuff going on demographically today is quite different than the forces that were in play in the 90s, he said. Chicago was a huge magnet for all that 90s immigration. In the years after Vallas left CPS, the immigrant population of the city stopped growing and the African-American population began a significant decline. Minority students make up about 90 percent of CPS enrollment, so the changing demographics had a significant impact at the schools. Vallas said, I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today. The bond rating and bottom line at CPS did improve significantly under Vallas, but new laws passed in Springfield also removed fiscal handcuffs which gave him more flexibility to manage the districts finances than his predecessors enjoyed. And he is correct that CPS has nearly 70,000 fewer students today than in 2001 when he departed. But that is due at least in part to significant demographic changes in Chicago outside the control of any schools chief. His claim is accurate but requires additional information to understand the context. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click herefor moreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3239 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Project Veritas latest installment in the American Pravda series takes aim at The New York Times, the supposed paper of record. In the first part of this series, Nicholas Dudich, Audience Strategy Editor for the Times extensive video library speaks candidly about how his left political bias influences his editorial judgement and reveals an unusual connection to former FBI Director James Comey, and a strange association with domestic terror group Antifa.Since this video came out, the New York Times released a statement saying they ve launched an investigation:This should have been done when hiring this former antifa thug who also worked for Clinton.RT reported:In the video, Dudich calls himself the gatekeeper for all the New York Times videos posted online, saying that his imprint is on every video we do. Any video that goes on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram I have a hand in that, Dudich said.When talking journalistic ethics, Dudich is captured sarcastically making air quotes while he said that he will be objective working for the Times before quickly admitting: no I m not. That s why I m there. According to the New York Times ethical handbook, employees must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of The Times. As a journalist, I m not able to give any money to any political organization. I m not able to volunteer for any political organization. I m not able to work for any nonprofit or charity. Like, there s a lot of guidelines and ethics, Dudich said.However, before joining the Times, Dudich worked social media on the 2012 presidential campaign of former President Barack Obama and the 2016 presidential campaign of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.When asked how he was able to be politically active and still work as a journalist, Dudich said that he had to leave his job at ABC to take a job where he wasn t deemed a journalist anymore in order to work for the Clinton campaign.Dudich said he made the sacrifice in order to work against Trump, who he said was a threat. I saw the threat and I was like, I want to do something, Dudich said. Trump was a threat and still is a threat, right? Trump is a threat, the interviewer interjects. He s a threat. Oh, he s a threat to everything, Dudich added.Read more President/co-founder of The Dream Corps and CNN contributor Van Jones Rich Polk CNN s Van Jones calls Russia nothing burger video edited, right-wing propaganda At one point, Dudich explains his idea to make Trump resign or leave office by going after his businesses and his dumb f**k of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric. Target that. Get people to boycott going to his hotels, Dudich said. If you can ruin the Trump brand and you put pressure on his business and you start investigating his business and you start shutting it down, or they re hacking or other things. He cares about his business more than he cares about being President. He would resign. Or he d lash out and do something incredibly illegal, which he would have to. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3240 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Email
The excitement over the US election is culminating as the due date is getting closer. Each candidate is trying to use any device at hand to denigrate the other and morality is the last thing to strike the minds of the candidates. The fact of the matter is that morality is a dead circle in the American politics. Hillary Clinton, the democratic candidate, uses f-word in a debate ( http://en.institutomanquehue.org/publications/news/did-hillary-clinton-mutter-donald-trump-debate.html ) watched by hundreds of millions of people around the world and finds no shame in it. Even American religious leaders believe that Clinton is not competent to be the president of a religious country like United States ( http://en.institutomanquehue.org/publications/news/christian-right-leader-hillary-clinton-hostile-biblical-christianity.html ). On the other hand, the GOP candidate, Donald trump , has no better condition. His sexual harassments and violent ideas towards women were shocking not only for female victims, but also for the dominant male group in America. The violent use of words to address different groups of people, mainly in social media ( http://en.institutomanquehue.org/publications/news/as-first-lady-melania-trump-wants-to-save-you-from-her-husband.html ) , made it hard for the parents to allow their kids to follow him. Besides, the number of women that accused Trump of groping and rape ( http://en.institutomanquehue.org/publications/news/list-women-accused-donald-trump-of-sexual-assault.html ) is increasing day by day and the list is running on. The so-called locker-room video of Trump talking dirty about women and his attitude towards them leaked to the public to be the final shot on the republican candidate, but it did not have that much affect. It seems that even grabbing “the women by the p…y” could not change their idea about Trump.
All these information, some released by the opponent candidate and some by other sources mainly WikiLeaks, seems to have had little significance in the public orientation in choosing a candidate. This has less to do with the people than with the administration system and media empire in the United States.
The fact that Trump does not talk about a rigged-election for respecting democracy and exercising the law is clear as a truth. His words that “I will accept the result of the election if I were chosen” is more like a joke than the words of a would-be president. What Assange is trying to say in his tweet is that the rig is being done on a higher level than the polls or the voting system. The whole administration and political system is rigged in America and the people will not choose a candidate; they are chosen to choose. This is the truth behind the weird public orientation towards election in spite of all the information released about the corruptions of the two candidates in mass media. The fact that the media and the political system are rigging the election in a latent mode is the key to the question raised about the mysteries of the American election. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3241 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The leaders of some of the European Union’s largest countries and institutions will be giving the elite gathering at Davos a miss next week, despite the timely issue of populism being high on the agenda. [The leaders of France, Germany, Italy, and Spain have all snubbed this year’s forum, as has the Commission leadership, preferring instead to send finance ministers, in the case of the four nations, and five commissioners. Their decision not to attend means they will not play a role in what is set to be a between China and the incoming Trump administration on how to address the popular opposition to globalisation. Their absence will also deny Britain’s prime minister, Theresa May, an opportunity to sound out her counterparts on issues surrounding Brexit, just weeks before she is due to enact Article 50 and begin the process of withdrawing Britain from the EU. Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to dominate this year’s World Economic Forum (WEF) held annually at the Swiss ski resort of Davos. The first Chinese president to attend the Forum, Xi is expected to take on Donald Trump’s rhetoric during his keynote speech, by putting forward his views on steering “economic globalization towards greater inclusivenessâ€. As the Forum runs between January, with the closing ceremony due to take place just hours before Donald Trump’s inauguration as president, he will be represented by Anthony Scaramucci, a member of his transition team. The Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong has told reporters that “channels of communication†will be open between the Chinese delegation and Trump’s transition team at the forum, although no formal meeting has yet been scheduled. The U. S. will also be represented by a strong delegation led by outgoing Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry. So far, Britain’s Theresa May, Ireland’s Enda Kenny, Mark Rutte of The Netherlands, and Sweden’s Stefan Löfven, among other European leaders, are expected to attend. WEF founder Klaus Shwab has said that this year’s meeting must make progress on the problems facing the world, and has argued that populism isn’t the answer. At a press conference, Shwab said: “Every simplified approach to deal with the global complex agenda is condemned to fail. “We cannot just have populist solutions. “The problems we face technologically, economically, socially and politically are so tremendous, such that sustainable solutions requite a systemic, holistic approach [ … ] and particularly the collaboration of all global stakeholders, united in one mission — improving the state of the world. †In total, aproximately 3, 000 participants will attend the event, including 1, 800 business leaders and around 50 heads of state, including the leaders of Paraguay, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Pakistan, Ukraine, and South Africa, among others. Hollywood stars Matt Damon and Forest Whittaker and the singer Shakira are also set to make an appearance. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3242 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton thinks U.S. regulators should closely scrutinize AT&T’s (T.N) acquisition of Time Warner(TWX.N), her spokesman said on Sunday. Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon told reporters on Sunday there were “a number of questions and concerns†about the deal “but there’s still a lot of information that needs to come out before any conclusions should be reached.†“But certainly she thinks regulators should scrutinize it closely,†Fallon said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3243 | 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 it Impossible to Cancel Recurring Donations to the Trump Campaign? Claim summaries: A CNN reporter tweeted out a former Donald Trump supporter's claim that it was impossible to cancel recurring donations to the campaign once initiated, but it wasn't clear that was always the case.
contextual information: On 3 August 2016, CNN reporter Jeremy Diamond shared a screenshot via Twitter of an e-mail sent by a frustrated former Trump supporter, claiming that it was impossible for backers to cancel recurring donations to the Trump campaign: Jeremy Diamond INBOX: Help, I set up a recurring contribution to Trump's campaign & want to cancel it: (cc: @realDonaldTrump) pic.twitter.com/TFOHhdZDlJ @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/TFOHhdZDlJ Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 Diamond's tweet sparked a number of articles and blog posts stating it was "impossible" to cancel recurring Trump campaign donations, based solely or primarily on the anecdotal, secondhand claim made in that tweet. Among the comments prompted by original tweet sent by Diamond were those left by other purported donors asserting that the claim wasn't exactly accurate: @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Spreading bogus info. When you contribute, you get receipt with an email + tel number to call if you need help. @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump M G (@MadaGasp) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump now please stop spreading false information, its all in the email you receive when you contribute @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Brian (@Brian_with_a_B) August 6, 2016 August 6, 2016 A large number of commenters expressed skepticism about the report, given that the claim was anonymously sourced from a single individual: @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Cheap shot: we all know you can contact your bank or other form of payment you use, to cancel right away. @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump Viktor Staudt (@ViktorStaudt) August 4, 2016 August 4, 2016 @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump so exactly who was this unknown mystery person that went straight to a journalist? pic.twitter.com/R4h78829CP @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/R4h78829CP Patti Hannah (@b6sangel) August 7, 2016 August 7, 2016 We were unable to turn up any reports about the issue that antedated Diamond's tweet. If any Trump donors had previously encountered difficulties canceling their recurring donations, they didn't seem to chatter very much about it on social media prior to 3 August 2016 (and ceasing to support Trump as a candidate is only one reason someone might seek to cancel a recurring payment). Diamond appeared to pass the baton on the story overall, updating followers later with a link to an article published by Mic: The folks at @mic took this ball and ran with it. Here's what they found: https://t.co/eTODFa4f3O https://t.co/cktSrf88Z2 @mic https://t.co/eTODFa4f3O https://t.co/cktSrf88Z2 Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) August 5, 2016 August 5, 2016 Diamond did not provide any further information about the claim, the claimant, or how he verified it before sharing it to Twitter. But Mic attempted to reproduce the problem on 4 August 2016 and gathered more information on the difficulty level of canceling recurring Trump donations. In a series of screenshots the site illustrated their findings, stating it was not possible to delete a stored credit card without replacing it with a separate valid credit card: After investigating, Mic can confirm that there is no easy option to stop recurring donations on Trump's donation site: We set up a recurring donation of $1 and found no button or other obvious way to cancel payments or remove a credit card from the system either on the homepage, the "update card" page, or in your contribution confirmation email. Once you're registered, if you try to change your payment information on Trump's site, you will see no option to remove your credit card only "update" it. Then, when you click on "update card," you see a page that allows you to alter your payment information but you cannot completely delete your credit card. You are forced to replace it with another valid card: Invalid numbers are rejected. One responder to the original tweet then objected to that claim, stating it was impossible to set up a recurring $1 donation: .@JDiamond1 You can't set up a $1.00 recurring amt.What else about this story is BS?@realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/kB4TalWOSE @JDiamond1 @realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/kB4TalWOSE ValerieNoFux (@OPFergVal) August 7, 2016 August 7, 2016 However, it appears that it is possible to enter any amount as a recurring donation: enter Mic confirmed that if a putative donor set up an account, then it would be possible for that person to cancel a recurring donation made via Trump's web site: It turns out that there is a way to delete your card from the Trump campaign's system, but it seems you must have first registered an account and created a password: If you did not do so, there is no clear way to cancel your payment. Assuming you did create an account and have logged in, to stop your payment you must click the small gray question mark icon in the upper right corner of the donations page. Then you will see [a separate] screen. In order to delete your card, you must click "manage." Then will you be redirected to the website of the Trump campaign's vendor. There you must click "recurring plans," and only then can you cancel your monthly payment; notably, even after you cancel, there is still no obvious way to delete your card number without replacing it with another valid number. Per Mic's screenshots, that vendor was Revv, and we sent an e-mail inquiry to them to clarify whether it was possible to cancel the recurring payments some other way. Revv However, even if the web site interface didn't allow for such a cancellation, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) notes that the the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) provides for consumers to cancel unwanted recurring payments: notes If you have regular, automatic deductions from your checking account (to pay for expenses such as insurance premiums or utility bills), the EFTA allows you to stop those payments. First, notify the vendor. Next, tell your bank about your request at least three business days before the money is scheduled to be transferred. Your notice to the bank may be oral, but the institution may require you to provide a written follow-up within 14 days to ensure that no additional payments are made. If you fail to provide a written follow-up, the bank is no longer responsible for stopping future payments. Stopping an automatic, recurring payment on a credit card is different. Start by putting in your request with the vendor. But if the vendor continues to charge your credit card, contact your card issuer. You'll have 60 days to dispute the charge, starting when the card issuer sends you the statement with the charges. While it appears to be atypically difficult to cancel a recurring donation to the Trump campaign, it is certainly not impossible, as individuals who create an account can do so via the web interface. Overall, it seemed the problem related more to the interface of a third-party vendor (Revv) to whom the Trump campaign had outsourced donations and not to the campaign itself. Dennin, James. "Donald Trump's Campaign Website Won't Let Some Cancel Recurring Donations."
Mic. 4 August 2016. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3244 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Can The American People Defeat The Oligarchy That Rules Them? By Paul Craig Roberts
Arent you surprised that Hillary and the presstitutes havent blamed Putin for FBI director Comeys reopening of the Hillary email case? But the presstitutes have done the next best thing for Hillary. They have made Comey the issue, not Hillary.
According to US Senator Harry Reid and the presstitutes, we dont need to worry about Hillarys crimes. After all, she is only a political woman feathering her nest, just as political men have done for ages. Why all this misogynist talk about Hillary? The presstitutes cry is that Comeys alleged crime is far more important. This woman-hating Republican violated the Hatch Act by telling Congress that the investigation he said was closed is now reopened. A very strange interpretation of the Hatch Act. During an election it is OK to announce that a candidate for president is cleared but it is not OK to say that a candidate is under investigation.
In July 2016 Comey violated the Hatch Act when he, on orders from the corrupt Obama Attorney General, announced Hillary clean. In so doing, Comey used the prestige of federal clearance of Hillarys violation of national security protocols to boost her standing in the election polls.
Actually, Hillarys standing in the polls is based on the pollsters over-weighting Hillary supporters in the polls. It is easy to produce a favorite if you overweight their supporters in the poll questions. If you look at the crowds attending the two candidates public appearances, it is clear that the American people prefer Donald Trump, who is opposed to war with Russia and China. War with nuclear powers is the big issue of the election.
Hillarys problem has the ruling American Oligarcy, for which Hillary is the total servant, concerned. What are they going to do about Trump if he wins? Will his fate be the same as John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, George Wallace? Time will tell. Or will a hotel maid appear at the last minute in the way that the Oligarchy got rid of Dominique Strauss-Kahn?
All of the American and Western feminists, progressives, and left-wing remnant fell for the obvious frame-up of Strauss-Kahn. After Strauss-Kahn was blocked from the Presidency of France and resigned as Director of the IMF, the New York authorities had to drop all charges against Strauss-Kahn. But Washington had succeeded in putting its French vassal, Sarkozy, in the presidency of France.
This is how the American Oligarchy destroys those it suspects might not serve its interests. The corrupt self-serving Oligarchy makes sure that it owns the government and the media, the think tanks and increasingly all of the major universities, and, of course, through the presstitutes, Americans minds.
The Oligarchs are now hard-pressed to rescue Hillary as US president, so lets see if the Oligarchs can once again deceive the American people.
While we wait, lets concern ourselves with another important issue. The Clinton crime syndicate in the closing years of the 20th century allowed a small handful of mega-corporations to consolidate the US media in a few hands. This vast increase in the power of the Oligarchy was accomplished despite US anti-trust law. The media mergers destroyed the American tradition of a dispersed and independent media.
But really, what does federal law mean to the One Percent. Nothing whatsoever. The One Percents power makes them immune to law. Hillarys crimes might cost her the election, but she wont go to jail.
Not content with 90% control of the US media, the Oligarchy wants more concentration and more control. Looks like they will be getting it, thanks to the corrupt US government. The Federal Trade Commission is supposed to enforce US anti-trust law. Instead, the federal agency routinely violates US anti-trust law by permitting monopoly concentrations of business interests.
Because of the failure of the federal government to enforce federal law, we now have banks too big to fail, unregulated Internet monopoly, and the evisceration of a dispersed and independent media.
Not so long ago there was a field of economics known as anti-trust. Ph.D. candidates specialized in and wrote dissertations about public control of monopoly power. I assume that this field of economics, like the America of my youth, no longer exists.
In the article below, Rahul Manchanda, explains that yet again another huge media conglomerate is being swallowed and acquired by another huge media conglomerate, to create another gargantuan media outlet, in another consolidation of the enormous power, money, wealth, intimidation, conspiracy and control that eviscerates the US Constitution and the First Amendment.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West , How America Was Lost , and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order . | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3245 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: US coal deprives Ukraine of its independence and may lead to a bankruptcy. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3246 | 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 Lowe's Donate $25M to Minority-Owned Businesses, While Home Depot Founder Gave to Trump? Claim summaries: A meme comparing political involvement of the home improvement chains left out some context.
contextual information: In early June 2020, a meme comparing two popular U.S. home improvement chains spread across social media: The facts presented are true, but some context was missing. It's true that Lowe's has created a $25 million grant for minority-owned small businesses trying to reopen after being forced to close due to the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic. As CNBC reported on May 20, 2020: grant CNBC reported Lowes is dishing out the funds to help small businesses, especially home improvement professionals, in need of masks, personal protective equipment and other supplies to operate safely. The new funds follow $340 million of support the home improvement retailer provided for Covid-19 response activities in the first quarter. These are going to be minority businesses and other businesses that are now starting to reopen, CEO Marvin Ellison told CNBCs Jim Cramer in a Mad Money interview. So we just want to continue to not only run a good business but also be a great corporate citizen in all of the communities that we operate in. It is also true that Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus donated $7 million to U.S. President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. He vowed to again support Trump in his 2020 run against presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. donated Marcus, a philanthropist who gives billions of dollars away to various causes, is generally a large-ticket financial supporter of Republican politicians and organizations. But he also retired from his position as Home Depot's company chairman in 2002. (Home Depot's other co-founder, Arthur Blank, who is also retired from the company, appears to donate primarily to Democrats.) gives appears to The Home Depot political action committee on the other hand has contributed a total of $1,495,000 to both Democratic and Republican federal candidates in 2020, with 44% of those contributions going to Democrats and 56% to Republicans, according to the campaign transparency tracking tool Open Secrets. both Meantime the political action committee for Lowe's donated a total of $540,500 to federal candidates in both parties, with 30% going to Democrats and 70% to Republicans, per Open Secrets. Political action committees (PACs) associated with corporations are separate organizations that are funded by employees or owners of the company (but not the company itself). These PACs donate money to political candidates and organizations they believe to be "aligned with their financial goals," explains Open Secrets. explains Given the meme leaves out important context about political contributions and Marcus' current involvement with Home Depot, we rate this claim "true." Clifford, Tyler. "Lowes Funds $25 Million in Grants to Help Minority Businesses Reopen; CEO Challenges Other Executives to Do Our Part.'"
CNBC. 20 May 2020. Kempner, Matt."Atlanta Billionaire Plans to Give Almost All of It Away."
Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 30 June 2019. Evers-Hillstrom, Karl."Why Corporate PACs Have an Advantage."
Open Secrets.14 February 2020. Updated to include political contribution information about Home Depot's other co-founder, Arthur Blank. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3247 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: No, Pfizer does not possess Neil Young's music collection. Claim summaries: Conspiracy theorists reached new lows in attempting to discredit Young's vocal opposition to vaccine skepticism.
contextual information: In early 2022, folk-rock legend Neil Young found himself the target of a laughable conspiracy theory after he spoke out against COVID-19-related misinformation. On Jan. 24, Young wrote that he wanted his music removed from the streaming platform Spotify, unless the company ended its agreement to host Joe Rogan's podcast, which has on several occasions provided a forum for potentially harmful misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. In response, Spotify removed Young's back catalog from its library, rather than cutting ties with Rogan. wrote misinformation removed In the midst of that controversy, vaccine skeptics and COVID-19 conspiracy theorists shared a ludicrous conspiracy theory claiming that the pharmaceutical company Pfizer which produces a widely-used COVID-19 vaccine either owned the rights to Young's music catalog or, through a chain of connections, held sway over the rock star and influenced, or even ordered, his pro-vaccination stance. For example, some social media users posted a meme with the text, "When you realize Neil Young's music catalogue is owned by Pfizer": posted meme Others did not explicitly claim that Pfizer itself owned some or all of Young's catalog, but did suggest that the company held sway over him, by way of a series of connections, and that therefore Young's opposition to Rogan and his criticism of vaccine misinformation should be dismissed as the result of corruption and self-compromise, rather than a principled stance. did suggest series connections On social media, a conspiracy theorist who uses the moniker An0maly outlined the theory in helpful detail, starting with the observation that in January 2021, Young reportedly sold half of his catalog to a U.K.-based investment fund called Hipgnosis, for around $150 million. An0maly continued: outlined the theory So, 50% to UK investment fund Hipgnosis. In October of 2021, Blackstone and Hipgnosis Song Management launched [a] "$1 billion partnership to invest in songs, recorded music, music IP and royalties." Interesting. Blackstone is "an American alternative investment management company" who, interestingly enough, in 2020 announced the appointment of "Jeffrey B. Kindler, former chairman and CEO of Pfizer, as [a] senior adviser." Now I don't know the answer to this, but did Neil Young independently make the decision to try and blackball Joe Rogan for questioning big pharma and the government narrative? Or was it a team decision with a multi-billion-dollar investment firm who also owns a big chunk of his music? The first point to note here is that, even among those promulgating the Young-Pfizer theory, it is not seriously suggested that Pfizer itself which is, after all, a pharmaceutical company owns the rights to any of Young's music. That claim can be dismissed. Before assessing the logic behind the theory, and its coherence, it's worth briefly evaluating the accuracy of each of its components. First, it appears to be true that, in January 2021, Young sold half of his songs to Hipgnosis. In a news release, Hipgnosis wrote: "...The Company has acquired 50% of Neil Youngs worldwide copyright and income interests in his entire song catalogue comprising 1,180 songs." news release Secondly, it is also true that in October 2021, Blackstone bought an ownership stake in Hipgnosis, as demonstrated in news releases published by both companies. Finally, it is also true that in August 2020, Blackstone hired Jeff Kindler as a senior advisor, and that Kindler used to be the chairman and CEO of Pfizer. both companies hired Jeff Kindler used to be However, rather than having uncovered a web of corruption, those pushing the Young-Pfizer story were engaging in the classic conspiracy theorist's fallacy of finding whatever possible connection they can between two separate entities (in this case, Young and Pfizer) without first testing the logical or chronological basis of that putative link. In other words, "connecting the dots" by whatever means available, rather than uncovering an actual, organic conspiracy. Let's look at the sequence of events. Kindler left Pfizer in 2010 a full decade before he joined Blackstone, and before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted Pfizer to develop a vaccine along with its German partner BioNTech. left Pfizer in 2010 Blackstone is a publicly traded company, meaning it has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders, and Kindler, in turn, has a professional obligation to provide sound business and strategic advice to Blackstone. Aside from presenting no concrete evidence whatsoever, those pushing the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory appear to be asking readers to believe, despite these circumstances, one of two explanations: publicly traded company As outlandish as these scenarios are, they are premised on even shakier assumptions: for example, that Kindler was even consulted on the Blackstone-Hipgnosis deal; or that if he was, he was in favor of it; and that Young has any remaining financial or commercial obligations to Hipgnosis and/or Blackstone after the sale of half his music after all, if that deal is already done, what is the supposed basis of Hipgnosis or Blackstone's putative leverage over Young? It's not necessary to list, in excruciating detail, each of the known factual and logical flaws associated with the Young-Pfizer conspiracy theory. The claim that the pharmaceutical company "owned Young's music catalog" was patently false, and the theory of a fantastical web of corruption, with Kindler at its centre, was presented without any concrete evidence and, perhaps more importantly, made no sense whatsoever. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3248 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A bill to ease restrictions on energy development on U.S. tribal lands has a good chance of passing the Republican-controlled Congress this year, after several failed attempts since 2013, the chair of the Senate Indian affairs committee said. Many Republican lawmakers, along with President Donald Trump, have expressed support for more oil drilling, coal mining and other energy projects on Native American reservations, which are overseen by the federal government. Several additional layers of regulatory bureaucracy have slowed those efforts. “I think we will be able to get the bill through the House this go around,†Republican Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota, who authored the bill with seven other Republican Senators, said in a recent interview with Reuters. He said he believed the bill also had the support of “a broad spectrum of tribes across the country†and would “empower†Native Americans. The bill, dubbed the Tribal Energy Development and Self Determination Act, would authorize tribes to conduct their own energy resource appraisals. It would streamline the permitting process for drilling and mining and provide incentives for tribes to enter into joint-venture agreements with private companies. Former President Barack Obama had opposed a previous House version of the bill in 2015 because it would have exempted tribes from some federal environmental regulations. Other versions were blocked after being rolled into broader bills that were defeated. Tribal lands cover just 2 percent of the nation’s surface but by some estimates contain as much as a fifth of all remaining U.S. oil and gas reserves. But clearing regulatory hurdles for a single project on tribal lands can take as many as 50 steps, compared to a half dozen on private property, according to Reuters interviews conducted in January with tribal leaders, lawyers, oil company executives and federal regulators. Hoeven and Montana Republican Senator Steve Daines joined around a dozen representatives of mineral-rich tribes for a meeting with White House officials last week to discuss ways to reduce those barriers. Tribal participants at the meeting included representatives of the Crow Agency of Montana, the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, the Navajo Nation and the Southern Ute Indian tribe of Colorado | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3249 | 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: Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction and EITC from Tax Code Claim summaries: Has Congress eliminated the child tax credit, earned income tax credit (EITC) and mortgage deductions due to the influence of Koch Industries?
contextual information: Claim: Congress has eliminated the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit (EITC), and mortgage deductions from the tax code under pressure from lobby groups and the Koch brothers. Example: [Collected via Twitter, November 2014] Are u kidding!? Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction & E.I.T.C Origins: On 11 November 2014, the National Report published an article claiming a "heavy burst of lobbying" by groups including the Koch brothers' Koch Industries preceded a vote whereby Congress rescinded several common tax breaks long afforded to millions of Americans. article According to the article, the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction were all forms of "entitlement payouts" that had been eliminated beginning with the 2014 fiscal year to allow "job creators" to flourish: The deeply unpopular congress, whose approval rating hovers around a historic low of 10%, has voted to remove the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit and the mortgage interest deduction from the tax code starting with the 2014 fiscal year. The move is almost assured to solidify the perception of the 113rd Congress of the United States as deeply disconnected from the struggles and desires of the populace it is supposed to serve. The move, long championed by entitlement reform advocates like congressman Paul Ryan R-Wisconsin and Ted Cruz R-Texas, will cut entitlement payouts by a staggering 177 billion dollars. 54.33 billion dollars in savings will be realized from discontinuing the earned income tax credit, which generally pays those making less than 12 thousand dollars yearly large cash tax rebates far in excess of the actual tax they paid. 69.7 billion will be saved from the mortgage interest tax deduction, which critics say primarily favors top income earners. The elimination of the child tax credit, which critics say serves no fair purpose, will result in an additional 54 billion dollar savings. The article was nothing but a chain-yanking spoof, however: The National Report is a well-known fake news outlet notorious for publishing click-baiting, completely false stories such as "15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism," "Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say," and "Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6." 15 Year Old Who 'SWATTED' Gamer Convicted of Domestic Terrorism Solar Panels Drain the Sun's Energy, Experts Say Vince Gilligan Announces Breaking Bad Season 6 The article also quoted economist "Paul Horner" on Congress' purported tax credit repeal. If that name sounds familiar, it's because Paul Horner is a National Report writer whose name is used as a recurring character in various stories published by the site. Last updated: 13 November 2014 < | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3250 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: PUTNAM COUNTY, Fla. — In Marine Corps boot camp, Thomas Weaver learned to endure punches, kicks and choking by drill instructors in the Third Recruit Training Battalion at Parris Island, S. C. When one instructor repeatedly bashed his head against a doorway, he kept quiet and acted as if it were no big deal. But what he eventually could not take was the lying that covered up the abuse. “We were taught the Marines is all about honor and honesty, and my superiors were constantly telling us all to lie about what was happening,†Mr. Weaver, 21, said in a recent interview at his parents’ home in rural northern Florida. “I had been really proud to join the Marines, but I was not proud of what we were doing. †A Marine Corps investigation prompted in part by Mr. Weaver’s information has uncovered widespread abuse by drill instructors in the Thumping Third. In a lengthy interview, Mr. Weaver — a recruit who has since been kicked out of the military, ending his career — provided new details of how he said hazing infected all levels of drill instructors and instructors carefully concealed their abuse and threatened to give recruits “stitches†if anyone told. The continuing inquiry has so far led to the removal of three leaders. The corps has said 20 Marines face possible criminal charges. One drill instructor tumbled a Muslim recruit in a hot clothes dryer, according to a report from the investigation. The same instructor hazed another Muslim recruit repeatedly shortly before the recruit leapt to his death from the barracks, the report found. The Marines declined to comment on Mr. Weaver’s accusations, and certain aspects were impossible to corroborate. Another Marine in the battalion confirmed most details of his account, but asked to remain unnamed, saying he feared being singled out for retribution. “We were all scared, terrified,†Mr. Weaver said. “I wrote a lot of letters home about what was going on, but I tore them all up because I was afraid the drill instructors would read them. †Hazing in Marine Corps boot camp has popped up persistently over the years, even as the leadership has added more safeguards. The stubborn problem reveals an underlying struggle in the Marine Corps over its identity. Most officers are pushing for an inclusive and orderly force, with more women and minorities, and strict regulations to protect against abuse. But in the ranks, a widespread belief holds that the corps, which prides itself on making some of the toughest war fighters in the world, needs harsh training and must push back to preserve traditions against the creep of politically correct mediocrity. “It’s like, they are so focused on trying to make real Marines that they don’t see how they are hurting a lot of good recruits,†said Mr. Weaver, who has begun telling his story publicly. Mr. Weaver graduated from boot camp in July 2015, near the top of his class. He was meritoriously promoted ahead of others and planned to make a military career. But what he saw at boot camp gnawed at him until he could no longer sleep, he said, and he was too depressed to attend his next level of training. He was hospitalized in September on suicide watch. In November, he told his commander he was too depressed to train, and the Marine Corps moved to formally discipline him. That month, Mr. Weaver’s father, Troy Weaver, contacted the commander to explain that he thought his son’s depression was a result of hazing in boot camp. His son then gave a detailed written account to his superiors about what he had seen at Parris Island, and the inquiry was opened. In December, Mr. Weaver was kicked out of the Marine Corps for not training and given an discharge used to punish bad troops. He is trying to upgrade his discharge, but the system is slow and appeals are often unsuccessful. In a statement, the Marine Corps said that Mr. Weaver’s depression did not qualify for a medical discharge and that an discharge is proper when troops refuse to train. Despite the common image of boot camp as a place where barking sergeants in hats have nearly free rein to harass recruits, strict rules control what instructors can do. They cannot swear at recruits, hit them, kick them or even touch them unless it is to provide guidance during training that regulations call “corrective action. †Regulations also limit what the Marines call “incentive trainingâ€: extra crunches and other exercise as punishment. There are limits, for example, on how often and for how long such exercises can be ordered, and rules require that they be performed on a padded athletic mat. Mr. Weaver, a varsity track runner and captain of his high school soccer team who arrived at Parris Island ready to face grueling physical tests, said he soon found that drill instructors treated the rules with contempt. A few days into training, while being issued equipment, he said, he watched an instructor grab a recruit by the neck after a minor mistake and slam him to the ground, where he held him by the throat while swearing at him. After choking the recruit, the instructor stood up, looked at the rest of the group and asked them whether he was hurting the recruit or “making a corrective action,†Mr. Weaver said. “We all said ‘You were making a corrective action, sir,’ †Mr. Weaver said. “We were all too scared to say anything else. †“Every drill instructor played that card,†he added. “They would hit someone or choke someone, then made us say it was O. K. when they knew it wasn’t. †Instructors forced recruits to hold stress positions on concrete until elbows and knuckles bled, he said. They often ordered recruits to form a human wall to hide punishment from view or took recruits alone into the bathroom. Instructors singled out minority recruits they disliked for extra hazing, Mr. Weaver said, including two immigrants, a man with what Mr. Weaver called a “feminine voice†and a Muslim from Brooklyn whom instructors called “the terrorist. †Twice, Mr. Weaver said, the Muslim recruit was sent for medical attention after long bouts of extra training. “They would just push them, try to make them fail,†Mr. Weaver said. That recruit, who is still in the Marines, declined to comment. Instructors hid hazing from officers, Mr. Weaver said, and officers did little to police it. Most of the abuse, he said, happened in the barracks, known in the Marine Corps as squad bays, where officers rarely ventured and where instructors said “real Marines are made. †There, Mr. Weaver said, instructors piled dozens of recruits in a small boiler room and walked on them. He also said the instructors covered the squad bay in laundry soap and ordered the recruits to push the tallest recruit along the concrete as “a human scrub brush. †“They were always telling us, ‘What happens in the squad bay stays in the squad bay,’ †Mr. Weaver said. Recruits were warned not to report the abuse, he said, and instructors repeated a motto used in street gangs and prisons, “Snitches get stitches. †Junior and senior instructors covered for one another, he said. Violence was a common response to slight missteps, Mr. Weaver said. He said he saw his senior drill instructor and another instructor take one recruit into the woods after the recruit accidentally struck one of the instructors during a training exercise, and beat him bloody. Mr. Weaver said he was grabbed by the shirt by a third instructor after inadvertently bumping into him, and that instructor slammed his head repeatedly against the doorway until other recruits pulled him away. Mr. Weaver said that he reported the assault to his senior drill instructor, but that his instructor responded by saying that Mr. Weaver did not appear to be injured and should stay out of the instructors’ way. Mr. Weaver also provided new details about the night in July last year when the Muslim recruit was forced into a dryer. Late that night, he said, four or five drill instructors from another platoon came into the squad bay smelling of alcohol and screamed at recruits to lie face down on the floor. Mr. Weaver said he watched them repeatedly slap a recruit, hard enough that the blow could be heard through the barracks. Later, Mr. Weaver said, the group returned. He watched from his bunk as they took the Muslim recruit into the laundry room. “We heard screaming, doors being slammed, loud noises,†Mr. Weaver said. “I was scared, I didn’t know what they were doing to him. †Afterward, Mr. Weaver said, the recruit was clearly shaken. Mr. Weaver tried to comfort him when, he said, one of his drill instructors came in and told the Muslim recruit not to report what had happened. Mr. Weaver graduated from basic training in July and shipped off to Naval Air Station Pensacola, in Florida. But the abuse he had seen in boot camp caught up with him, he said. Bad dreams kept him from sleeping he lost motivation to train. A lifelong runner, he lacked the energy to go for a jog on the beach, he said. “Everyone was so proud of me, but I just saw the Marines as one big lie that I was now a part of,†he said. After he was hospitalized for being suicidal in September, he was put on medication and began seeing a base psychologist. In November Mr. Weaver told his commander he was not well enough to train. The psychologist treating him wrote two letters to his commander, Maj. Jenny A. Colegate, recommending a general discharge for medical reasons. But Major Colegate, who in a previous assignment had trained recruits at Parris Island, ordered Mr. Weaver to return to duty. When he refused, citing the psychologist’s advice, the Marines discharged him for a “pattern of misconduct. †Maj. Clark Carpenter, a Marine Corps spokesman, said that Major Colegate was not available for comment but that the discharge was technically correct because Mr. Weaver had refused to train. He added, though, that not all information had been included in the recommendation for a discharge that went for final approval, and that it was likely that if it had been included, Mr. Weaver would not have received the administrative discharge. For months Mr. Weaver has been doing odd jobs in his neighborhood. The discharge on his record has become a badge of shame and makes it hard to find work, he said. He said he feels as if his future was taken from him. “All I ever wanted to be was a Marine, and I was a good Marine,†he said. “But now I’m being punished for a bunch of stupid stuff that isn’t supposed to happen. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3251 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to hear an appeal asserting that the death penalty violates the U.S. Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment filed by a Louisiana man convicted of fatally shooting his pregnant former girlfriend. Two of the eight justices, liberals Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said they would have accepted the case, repeating concerns about the death penalty’s constitutionality they raised in a different case last year. The justices, who have sharply disagreed among themselves over capital punishment, declined to consider the appeal brought by Lamondre Tucker, who was sentenced to death for the 2008 murder of 18-year-old Tavia Sills in Shreveport. Sills, nearly five months pregnant, was shot three times and her body was dumped in a pond. Tucker, who is black, had argued in part that black males had an increased likelihood of being convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Louisiana’s Caddo Parish due to endemic racism. At the time of Tucker’s conviction, a Confederate flag, symbol of the pro-slavery Southern states that lost the U.S. Civil War that ended in 1865, flew outside the county courthouse, his lawyers said in court filings. Breyer wrote that Tucker “may well have received the death penalty not because of the comparative egregiousness of his crime, but because of an arbitrary feature of his case, namely geography.†“One could reasonably believe that if Tucker had committed the same crime just across the Red River in, say, Bossier Parish, he would not now be on death row,†Breyer said. Breyer’s comments echoed similar remarks he made in June 2015 when the court upheld Oklahoma’s lethal injection procedures. The shorthanded court has steered clear of taking major cases since the February death of Justice Antonin Scalia, but even at full strength may not have accepted this one. There is no indication the court is any closer to taking a case that would challenge the death penalty directly, with the court’s two other liberals, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, not joining Breyer’s opinion. Four votes are needed for the justices to hear a case. The pregnant Sills had told Tucker she believed he was the father. Later testing showed Tucker, 18 at the time of the murder, was not the father. The fetus did not survive. The Supreme Court left in place a September 2015 Louisiana Supreme Court ruling that rejected Tucker’s legal arguments and upheld his conviction and death sentence. In the United States, 31 states have the death penalty and 19 do not. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3252 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Sunni Islamic State ( ) has boasted that key U. S. Middle East ally Saudi Arabia is the top provider of terrorists for the jihadist group in Iraq, reports Fox News, citing Iraqi military sources. [Sunni Saudi Arabia shares an estimated border with Iraq. Nevertheless, Fox News reports that the Saudi jihadists crossed into Iraq over the border the country shares with both Turkey and Syria. The news outlet learned from unnamed Iraqi intelligence sources that jihadist from the Saudi kingdom comprise nearly (up to 30 percent) of all ISIS terrorists in Iraq, adding that “Saudis comprise the largest single contingent of ISIS fighters, with Russian Chechens making up the contingent. †Speaking to the news outlet on condition of anonymity, a Iraqi intelligence officer said, “The Saudi presence in ISIS is very large. What we have left are mainly Iraqis and Saudis. †“The Saudis make up a large number of suicide bombers, as they already have the ground work of radicalization installed in their minds from radical sheikhs in Saudi [Arabia]. And we’ve caught important ISIS commanders,†he added. Fox News points out that it has seen various photographs and documents showing identification and credit cards of Saudi terrorists. The report comes nearly a month after an article by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) revealed that President Donald Trump’s administration is considering forming a military alliance with major Middle East allies, including the Sunni Saudi kingdom, to combat Shiite Iran. President Trump’s coalition would bring together Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Israel, Egypt, and Jordan. The Sharia kingdom Saudi Arabia is regarded as a hotbed and top global exporter of radical Islamic thought, namely the Sunni extremist ideology of Wahhabism, adhered to by ISIS and various other jihadists groups. Saudi Arabia imposes extremely strict Islamic laws on its citizens. “Wahhabism was born in Saudi Arabia. Saudi is leading those extremist organizations like ISIS,†an anonymous Iraqi official told Fox News. “They have officials and fighters among their ranks. Saudi is nothing without U. S. protection it is only a bite for Iran to eat. †Sunni Saudi Arabia considers Shiite Iran its regional rival. Iran exerts tremendous influence over the government of Iraq where militias backed by the Islamic Republic are fighting ISIS. Saudi Arabia is part of the U. S. coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The Sunni kingdom, which has cracked down on the jihadist group within its borders, has also suffered attacks carried out by ISIS. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3253 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 54 Views November 21, 2016 GOLD , KWN King World News
As we kick off the fourth week of trading in November, this is the real reason why the public is broke and the middle class is being destroyed.
James Turk: “ It is good to see gold and silver starting the week in a positive way with their prices stabilizing, Eric. When you look at the recent dip in prices, it’s been a rough couple of weeks. But then again, when you see distortions like backwardation in the market, it is a good time to buy… Sponsored
Gold and silver went into a steep backwardation after Trump’s victory, with the spot price above the price for December delivery. In fact, even though December delivery begins in just over a week, spot gold and silver are still backwardated. So the demand for physical metal remains strong.
I have been expecting to see strength in the precious metals as we work toward the end of the year. It’s always impossible to predict when the short-term trend will turn, but it is time for a short-term trend reversal. This week often sees them.
With the US celebrating Thanksgiving on Thursday, there are only three days of trading. So look for short covering and buying by bargain hunters to take the precious metals higher this week. In fact, with today’s action, I expect that both gold and silver are now beginning the long road back to higher prices. As they do so, gold and silver will simply be resuming this year’s uptrend.
After a couple of weeks like we just had, it is easy to lose sight that gold and silver are up 14% and 20% respectively year-to-date. Owning physical gold and physical silver allows everyone over the long-term to keep their head above water, which is not easy to do as the dollar and other currencies continue to lose purchasing power.
Part of the problem, Eric, is that it is hard to see how badly currencies are doing. It is a natural tendency to focus on the short-term, so it is easy to lose sight of the long-term. To illustrate this point, I was reading the latest report of ShadowStats.com , and this chart literally jumped off the page when I saw it. It is very revealing.
This chart shows average weekly wages in the US, adjusted for inflation in two ways. First, it shows what has happened to average weekly wages in the US after adjusting the loss of dollar purchasing power by using the Consumer Price Index as prepared and reported by the federal government, which is the red line.
It shows that even by the government’s own measure, wages are below where they were in the 1960s and 1970s. People’s standards of living are not improving.
Williams Exposes How The Middle Class Is Being Systematically Destroyed The blue line is calculated by ShadowStats, using the CPU formula used by the federal government in 1990. It shows what is really happening to wages and the purchasing power of the dollar.
The big difference in these two lines results from the changes the federal government made to the CPI formula. The cumulative effect of these changes have made US dollar inflation look much smaller than it really is.
When looking at a chart like this, it is little wonder why Trump won. This chart also makes clear why it is foolhardy to rely on government statistics. It also shows why owning gold is important.
In 1990, the average price of crude oil was $24.50, and the average gold price was $384. So one ounce of gold could buy 15.6 barrels of crude oil. Over the past year, crude oil has averaged $41.80 per barrel, while the average price of gold was $1,240, which is equivalent to 29.7 barrels of crude oil. This is just one example of why gold is good money. It is money that protects your hard earned purchasing power.
Are You Prepared For The Unwinding Of The Biggest Bubble In History? | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3254 | 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: Congressional Budget Office says 8 (percent) unemployment till 2014!
contextual information: In an Aug. 24, 2011,Twitter post, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn said of the Congressional Budget Office: CBO says 8 (percent) unemployment till 2014!Well assume the Texas Republican doesnt consider this fabulous news, though the predicted rate would be about a percentage point lower than the July 2011 national jobless rate of 9.1 percent,as reported bythe U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.A reminder: The unemployment rate is a measure of the number of jobless people who are available for work and are actively seeking jobs, expressed as a percentage of the labor force.Did Cornyn recap accurately?The nonpartisan CBOssummaryof its latest economic projections says that with modest economic growth expected for the next few years, the office expects the jobless rate to fall to 8.9 percent the fourth quarter of this year and to 8.5 percent the fourth quarter of 2012. And indeed, the report says, the rate will remain above 8 percent until 2014.The nations gross domestic product grew 1 percent the second quarter of this year after growing .4 percent in the years first three months, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysisreported in August. According to the CBO forecast, the economy will grow slowly in coming years as the federal deficit shrinks, though the prediction about the deficit assumes, among other things, that Congress will not extend all the tax cuts launched under President George W. Bush and temporarily extended under President Barack Obama.In its full report, the CBO projects the annual unemployment rate to average 8.7 percent in 2012 and 2013, which would be an improvement on the 2010 and 2009 averages of 9.6 percent and 9.3 percent, respectively, but would be worse than the 2008 average of 5.8 percent,according tothe Bureau of Labor Statistics.CBO forecasts the unemployment rate falling to an average of 5.4 percent in 2016 and 5.2 percent in 2017 through 2021, which would be the lowest rate since 2007, when the average was 4.6 percent. The report says the projected 5.2 percent rate in those years would match its expected natural unemployment rate for the period.Economists talk about a natural unemployment rate because even in a strong, healthy economy there is always some degree of employee turnover as businesses adopt new technologies and make other staff changes, and as a certain percentage of workers, for various professional and personal reasons, look for new jobs.Things are unsettled now, the CBO report says, with weakness in the demand for goods and services being the principal restraint on hiring, but structural impediments in the labor market such as a mismatch between the requirements of existing job openings and the characteristics of job seekers (including their skills and geographic location) appear to be hindering hiring as well.Other measures also show a great deal of weakness in the labor market, the report says. The number of unemployed workers per job opening averaged about 4 throughout the first half of 2011, down from an average of slightly over 6 in 2009 but still much higher than it was before the recession. In addition, the number of people who are employed part time but want full-time work averaged about 8.5 million in the first half of 2011, slightly below the number in the previous two years but still nearly double the pre-recession figure.The report continues: Likewise, the share of unemployed people who have been out of work for a long time is unusually high. On average, 44 percent of workers who were unemployed in the first half of 2011 had been jobless for more than six months. Moreover, in mid-2011, 31 percent of unemployed workers had been jobless for at least a year. Those rates of long-term unemployment are unprecedented in the post-World War II era.Were not judging here whos responsible for the nations unemployment troubles, but how accurately Cornyn echoed the CBOs projection. His statement rates True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3255 | 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 an Impeached US President Lose Benefits? Claim summaries: Being removed from office is not the only potential consequence of impeachment.
contextual information: In the days following the pro-Trump riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, several lawmakers began calling for U.S. President Donald Trump to be impeached for a second time, this time, according to one draft of the impeachment articles, for "incitement of insurrection." As the momentum for impeachment built, some social media users argued that it wasn't worth impeaching Trump again, as he would be leaving office in a few days regardless. However, according to a viral message from Twitter user @BenCostiloe, the potential consequences of impeachment extended beyond removal from office. This message, which was shared more than 150,000 times, claimed that impeaching Trump would also strip him of several post-presidency benefits, such as a lifetime pension, security detail, and the ability to run for office in the future. This message is generally accurate. However, it should be noted that a president is only stripped of these benefits if they are impeached and removed from office. As of this writing, Trump, who was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in December 2019, will still receive presidential benefits, as he was not convicted by the Senate and removed from office. U.S. President Bill Clinton, for example, still receives the benefits bestowed on former presidents even though he, too, was impeached. The benefits a president receives after leaving office are outlined in the Former Presidents Act of 1958. That law states that former presidents shall receive a lifetime pension (of approximately $200,000 annually), travel-related expenses up to $1 million each fiscal year, and protection from the Secret Service. It also notes that these benefits shall not be awarded to presidents whose service was terminated by removal "pursuant to section 4 of article II of the Constitution of the United States of America." Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Mother Jones reported that the 1958 Former Presidents Act assures that no president leaves office without being set for life; it guarantees a pension, access to health insurance, office space, and staff. There is, however, one exception: These perks are only granted to presidents who are not removed from office in an impeachment trial. There is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose protection from the Secret Service. The Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 authorizes "the Secret Service to protect former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes." This act does not state any exceptions for an impeached and removed president. As this is uncharted territory, it's unclear how the term "former president" would be interpreted in this instance. We reached out to various historians for comment and will update this article accordingly. The final item listed in the viral tweet, "loses his ability to run in 2024," is a possibility, but not a foregone conclusion in the case of an impeachment conviction in the Senate. The U.S. Constitution states that a president "shall be removed from office if impeached and convicted." However, it is up to the Senate's judgment as to whether a removed president should be barred from holding future office. Here's an excerpt from the U.S. Senate website (emphasis ours): In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called managers, acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office. In short, if Trump is impeached and removed from office, he would lose many of the benefits awarded to former presidents. Updated [13 January 2021]: Article updated to note that there is some debate as to whether an impeached, convicted, and removed president would also lose Secret Service protection. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3256 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Abigail Marsh almost lost her life in a car accident. She was avoiding a dog in the middle of the street, and suddenly found her own life in danger. But a complete stranger stopped, got out of his car, helped her to safety, and then drove off, never even telling her his name.
Why did he do it though? That was the biggest question Marsh found herself asking, and it changed the course of her life. She has since made a career out of understanding the human capacity to care for others; where it comes from; how it develops. Marsh wondered why people do selfless things, and resolved to find out. She soon realized very little work had been done on this topic.
Altruism is a voluntary, costly behaviour that benefits only the other. And Marsh wanted to know what made some people more altruistic than others:
The actions of the man who rescued me meet the most stringent definition of altruism, which is a voluntary, costly behaviour motivated by the desire to help another individual. So it’s a selfless act intended to benefit only the other. What could possibly explain an action like that? One answer is compassion, obviously, which is a key driver of altruism. But then the question becomes, why do some people seem to have more of it than others? And the answer may be that the brains of highly altruistic people are different in fundamental ways.
To really figure it out, she did the opposite of what one might expect, however. She started on the opposite end by analyzing psychopaths. People with this disorder are missing the desire to help other people. They are often cold, uncaring, and antisocial individuals. But they’re not typically insensitive to other people’s emotions, just to the signs that other people are distressed:
The part of the brain that’s the most important for recognizing fearful expressions is called the amygdala. There are very rare cases of people who lack amygdalas completely, and they’re profoundly impaired in recognizing fearful expressions. And whereas healthy adults and children usually show big spikes in amygdala activity when they look at fearful expressions, psychopaths’ amygdalas are underreactive to these expressions. Sometimes they don’t react at all, which may be why they have trouble detecting these cues. Finally, psychopaths’ amygdalas are smaller than average by about 18 or 20 percent.
But in her Ted Talk, Marsh brings us back to altruism. She says that her main interest isn’t about why people don’t care for others, but why they do. “ So the real question is, could extraordinary altruism, which is the opposite of psychopathy in terms of compassion and the desire to help other people, emerge from a brain that is also the opposite of psychopathy?” she asks.
Extraordinary altruists have done things like give a healthy kidney to a complete stranger. But why?
“T he brains of these extraordinary altruists have certain special characteristics,” she says. “ They are better at recognizing other people’s fear. They’re literally better at detecting when somebody else is in distress. This may be in part because their amygdala is more reactive to these expressions. And remember, this is the same part of the brain that we found was underreactive in people who are psychopathic.”
“And finally, their amygdalas are larger than average as well, by about eight percent,” she adds.
What’s intriguing is that, when people were asked why they gave their kidney to a complete stranger, they didn’t know how to answer. They didn’t consider themselves unique or special, but normal, just like everyone else. They just did it, because that’s who they are. Even more intriguing is that the people the donors were giving their kidneys to weren’t in a close circle that somehow already connected them through other loved ones. They were totally removed human beings. And that’s pretty extraordinary:
I think the best description for this amazing lack of self-centeredness is humility, which is that quality that in the words of St. Augustine makes men as angels. And why is that? It’s because if there’s no center of your circle, there can be no inner rings or outer rings, nobody who is more or less worthy of your care and compassion than anybody else. And I think that this is what really distinguishes extraordinary altruists from the average person.
But the main lesson of Marsh’t talk is even more fundamental than all of this. “ I also think that this is a view of the world that’s attainable by many and maybe even most people. And I think this because at the societal level, expansions of altruism and compassion are already happening everywhere,” she explains.
Marsh believes that we all have the ability to take ourselves out of the center of the circle and extend the circle of compassion outward, so it brings in even total strangers. It looks like a globe outlined with people from all over the world holding hands in unity, in support, in love.
Watch Marsh’s full Ted Talk below: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3257 | 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: Estee Lauder Boycott Claim summaries: Is Estee Lauder the target of an Arab and Muslim boycott?
contextual information: Claim: American Muslims for Jerusalem have called for a boycott of Estee Lauder products. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] Estee Lauder Corporation (which is also is the parent company of Prescriptives, Mac, Bobbie Brown, La Mer, Jo Malone, Origins, Aramis, Aveda and Bumble and Bumble) is being boycotted by a loud and ambitious campaign of the world's Arab and Muslim community due to Ron Lauder's (Estee Lauder's President) support for Israel. Mr. Lauder has been extremely courageous and public in his support for the Jewish State and has taken real personal and financial risks to inform the world of the war that the Palestinian Authority has declared on Israel and Jews worldwide. To combat this boycott I suggest that we all go out and buy as much Estee Lauder and Clinique products as possible. Make the Estee Lauder and Clinique counters your gift of choice. Switch brands at least for a while. It is said that beauty has many discomforts. So does supporting those who speak for us. Am Yisrael Chai! PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! LET'S SHOW THE ARABS THAT PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WILL STAND TOGETHER. Ronnie Lauder is married to Jo Carol Knopf Lauder born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware. Her parents were humble Holocaust survivors! He also works undauntingly for the re-establishment of the Hungarian Jewish community. A good man! PLEASE PASS THIS MESSAGE! Origins: In February 2001, the American Muslims for Jerusalem, a political group in Washington, called for a worldwide Arab boycott of Estee Lauder products. The group was acting in protest against Ronald Lauder, chairman of Estee Lauder International and Clinique Laboratories, because of his "activities in support of Israeli right-wing extremists." A spokesman for the group said Muslims and Arabs had long been offended by Mr. Lauder's pro-Israeli views, but had not decided to call for a boycott until Mr. Lauder appeared at the "One Jerusalem" rally of religious and nationalist Israelis in January of that year. The call for an Arab and Muslim boycott of Estee Lauder almost immediately inspired an appeal to Jews and those of pro-Israeli sentiment to support the company by buying its products. This call to arms was circulated in many forms, including via the Internet. (No mention of the Arab/Muslim boycott, the anti-boycott, or Ron Lauder's actions appears on either the Estee Lauder or the American Muslims for Jerusalem web sites, though.) Ron Lauder has been a vocal supporter of Israel and Israeli causes for many years. In 1999 he attempted to broker a peace pact between Israel and Syria by acting as a go-between for Syrian President Hafez Assad and then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The deal failed because the two parties could not reach agreement on the disposition of the Golan Heights. Whether any boycott or a show of support would have an appreciable impact on Estee Lauder's bottom line is debatable when a multinational coporation with sales in the billions of dollars is involved, only the sustained, concerted actions of millions of consumers can make the needle so much as twitch. For the fiscal year ended 30 June 2001, Estee Lauder had net sales of $4.62 billion, which was an 8% increase on the preceding year's $4.37 billion. For the first three quarters of the fiscal year that will end on 30 June 2002, net sales are $3.57 billion, which is the nearly the same sales figure as the equivalent period last year. More simply, if there's a boycott or counter-boycott going on, the income statement isn't demonstrating any impact from it. Barbara "estee of execution" Mikkelson Additional Information: Estee Lauder Corporation Last updated: 1 October 2007 Sources: Barron, James. "Boldface Names." The New York Times. 28 February 2001 (p. B2). Dan, Uri and Niles Lathem. "Lauder Was a Go-Between for Israel, Syria." The New York Post . 6 October 1999 (p. 18). DeNitto, Emily. "New York, New York." Crain's New York Business. 13 August 2001 (p. 6). The New York Post. "Unkindest Cut for CNN Legend." 5 March 2001 (p. 8). | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3258 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: WASHINGTON — President Obama plans to name Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a senior Defense Department official said late Monday.
Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, currently the leader of U.S. Transportation Command, will be named vice chairman, said the official who was not authorized to speak publicly.
Dunford, a widely respected and well-liked officer at the Pentagon, has extensive battlefield experience, including as commander of all allied forces in Afghanistan. He will replace Army Gen. Martin Dempsey who is expected to retire later this summer after his second term expires. Selva would replace Adm. James Winnefeld.
A formal announcement from the White House is expected Tuesday, the official said.
Dunford quickly received support from one key member of the Senate Armed Services Committee — Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the panel's top Democrat.
"I have come to greatly value General Dunford's counsel and insight, and I particularly appreciate the concern he has for our men and women in uniform under his command," Reed said.
Michael O'Hanlon, a military analyst at the Brookings Institution, hailed Dunford as well suited to the job. "He is a brilliant choice," O'Hanlon said. "Smart, wise, creative, pragmatic, calm, affable, experienced."
Dunford has been commandant since last October. Prior to that, he had led U.S. and NATO forces from February 2013 to August 2014 in Afghanistan and oversaw the withdrawal of tens of thousands of American troops from the country.
An infantry officer, Dunford followed Gen. James Amos, a pilot, as commandant of the Marine Corps. He holds a master's degree in government from Georgetown University and a master's degree in international relations from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
As chairman, Dunford will be the military's most senior officer and adviser to the president. The Senate must approve the nomination of Dunford for the two-year term. Most often, chairmen serve two terms.
Among the primary challenges he'll inherit: the ongoing war against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria; Russia's increasing belligerence in Eastern Europe and the threat of automatic budget cuts known as sequestration.
He'll also have to deal with China's increasing ambitions in the Pacific and the military's long-standing desire to shift its resources toward that region, O'Hanlon said.
Selva's choice marks the return of airman to one of the top two slots for the first time since Gen. Richard Myers retired as chairman in 2005. Transportation Command lacks the visibility of some of the military's other top spots, including Central Command, which oversees the turbulent Middle East. But Transportation Command's function of moving troops, weapons and supplies around the globe is critically important.
A cargo plane pilot, Selva also has extensive experience inside the Pentagon. He served as assistant to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2008 to 2011. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3259 | 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 It True That Every Vote Used To Be Counted on Election Night? Claim summaries: No state releases complete and final results on election night, nor have they ever done so in modern history, according to experts, AP reported.
contextual information: On Nov. 1, 2022, the @catturd2 Twitter account, described by The Daily Beast as a "MAGA troll account," tweeted to its nearly 1 million followers, "Funny how we could easily count every vote in every state on election night until a few years ago." Similarly, Arizona Republican Rep. Paul Gosar claimed, hours before Election Day, that "one day is all it took until very recently" to "count all legal votes in an election." However, this assertion about past U.S. elections is false. On Nov. 7, The Associated Press reported that "no state releases complete and final results on election night" and that they haven't done so in modern history, according to experts. The tweet appeared to be pushing the notion that it now takes much longer to count the votes on and after Election Day to bolster the broader (and false) conspiracy theory alleging there has been widespread voter fraud in U.S. elections in recent years. The implication appears to be that the "delay" is caused by some sort of tampering on a massive scale in the days after an election. But researchers have never found any credible evidence of large-scale voting fraud in American elections. We're going to dive into reporting on past elections and show examples of how it wasn't true that every vote was counted by election night. Bear in mind that there are multiple examples like the following from each election year and that the certified, or final, vote count always occurs later. For the purpose of keeping this story brief, we have documented only a few examples from each past election year. Also, we want to note off the top that some states begin counting mail-in and absentee ballots early, whereas others wait to start tabulating votes until Election Day. Readers can find data on these states and their vote-counting procedures on the website for the National Conference of State Legislatures. On Nov. 1, 2020, The Arizona Republic newspaper reported of that year's U.S. presidential election, "Actual vote counts take weeks to tabulate." The reporting also noted that, "It's possible we won't know the winners of major races for more than a week." According to newspaper archives on Newspapers.com, votes were still being counted after Election Day in California, Delaware, and Florida, to name just the first three examples we found. On Nov. 6, 2018, KQED.org reported of Election Day, "For close races—for example, some of the hotly contested congressional contests—the final results may not be known for days, or possibly even weeks." The story added, "What will be needed tonight is generally in short supply these days: patience." We were able to quickly find newspaper articles published after election night that said votes for the midterms were still in the process of being counted in New Jersey, Florida, and California, and again, those were simply the first three examples we encountered in search results. On Nov. 7, 2016, Utah's Deseret News newspaper published a story with the headline, "Here's why precinct results don't tell the whole story on election night." The reporting said, "Don't be shocked if you don't know whether or not your county voted for a certain candidate. The majority of Utah's votes are now mail-in votes, which delay the count." After Election Day, votes were still being counted days later in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona, and other states. On Nov. 5, 2014, the Burlington Free Press newspaper reported that Vermont's Democratic and Republican gubernatorial candidates in the 2014 election had chosen to wait until the morning after election night to make statements, so that all votes would have a chance to be counted. Further, we quickly found examples that showed votes were still being counted after Election Day in Illinois, California, Alaska, Virginia, Louisiana, and other states. On Oct. 30, 2012, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser newspaper reported via USA Today that U.S. President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney were "prepared to take their presidential campaign to the courts" in the case that "election night doesn't produce a clear winner." Election Day was on Nov. 6 in 2012. The story documented how some states might take days to count all of the votes. "In Ohio, for example, provisional and absentee ballots can be counted as late as Nov. 16," the reporting said. After Election Day, multiple newspapers reported that Florida, Montana, and Maryland were still counting votes, and once again, those were just the first three examples we found when performing a quick and simple online search. In 2010, The New York Times reported that ballots in the state of Washington were still being counted as of Nov. 3, the day after the election. Similarly, the Naples Daily News published that votes were still being counted in Florida after Election Day. More examples were easily located on Newspapers.com, such as votes still being counted after Election Day in Minnesota, Illinois, and California, just to name a few. In 2008, a presidential election year, Election Day was on Nov. 4. On the next day, The Guardian, Politico, and many others reported that ballots were still being counted in some states. We quickly found newspaper articles that were published after the election that said it took days or even more than a week to count all of the votes in Massachusetts, Georgia, and Oregon, for example. On Nov. 9, 2006, two days after the 2006 election, the Billings Gazette newspaper reported that votes were still being counted in Montana. We also found that votes were still being counted in North Carolina as of Nov. 12, according to the Charlotte Observer. On Nov. 3, 2004, the Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper reported that votes were still being counted in a number of states for the U.S. presidential election. The same was also the case in Iowa, the Miami Herald published. These were just the first two examples we found. Election Day was on Nov. 2. In the 2002 election, The Monitor newspaper in McAllen, Texas, reported that votes were still being counted two days after Election Day. The same was the case days later in California, North Carolina, and Arizona, just to name a few examples we found. In the 2000 election, the winner of the presidential contest was not known for more than one month. As PBS.org reported, "A few hundred votes separated Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore in Florida," which led to a recount and the famous term, "hanging chads." The story from PBS, which was originally published by The Associated Press, also noted that Election Day ended without a clear winner in the presidential contests of 1876, 1824, and 1800. The data in this story goes back more than two decades, with PBS and AP adding context for elections from the 19th century. With all of this information in mind, it seems clear that some people could use a subscription to Newspapers.com. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3260 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Hundreds of women attended rallies in Paris and other French cities on Sunday to protest against sexual harassment in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal. U.S. movie mogul Weinstein has been accused by numerous women of having sexually harassed or assaulted them in incidents dating back to the 1980s, including three who said they were raped. Weinstein denies having non-consensual sex with anyone. Justice for Women ; We Won t Remain Silent ; The Shame Should Switch Sides read some of the signs held by French demonstrators, who were predominantly women. In Paris, protesters gathered at the Place de la Republique square under a grayish rainy sky, responding to a call that spread globally last week on social networks under the hashtag #MeToo. The hashtag has been used by millions of women across the world to share their experiences of sexual harassment and abuse on Twitter and rolling posts on Facebook. Among those at the rally in Paris was 88-year-old Vivianne Rouis, who attended with her daughter and granddaughter. At my age it s over, nothing s going to happen to me. But my daughter, my granddaughter, it s true that I think about them a lot, Rouis told Reuters TV. It has to stop. Because we re not objects, she added. Other protesters urged victims to speak up. It s less and less taboo in our society and I think it s important that women, and even men, who are abused, speak about it more freely, said Luana da Costa, 17. Hundreds of thousands of accounts of sexual harassment or abuse have been published under the French #balancetonporc or #squealonyourpig hashtag on Twitter over the past few weeks, including from prominent actresses such as Lea Seydoux. Some conservatives say the new trend amounts to an attack on the French way of life in the name of U.S.-style puritanism. Nationwide consultations started this month over a proposed new law that will include steps to fight sexual harassment on the streets as well as extend the statute of limitations for rape on minors. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3261 | 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: Komen Research and CEO Salary Claim summaries: Online criticism claims the Susan G. Komen breast cancer organization only gives 20% of their donations to cancer research and pays their CEO $684,000 per year.
contextual information: When Susan Goodman Komen died of breast cancer at the age of 33 in 1980, her younger sister, Nancy Goodman Brinker promised she would do whatever she could to help end that disease. Brinker fulfilled that promise by founding The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation (later known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure, then just Susan G. Komen) in 1982, a group that has since become the largest and most well known breast cancer organization in the United States: breast cancer Brinker fulfilled a promise to her sister that she would do everything she could to help eradicate the disease a disease that Brinker also was diagnosed with and successfully fought. "At that time, there was a stigma and shame around breast cancer," Brinker said. "You didn't talk about it. There were no 800-numbers, no Internet. Our government didn't spend much on breast cancer research. There were few major cancer centers with expertise about breast cancer. That's the world we faced when Suzy was diagnosed. It's a world I watched her suffer in, and it's a world she wanted us to change." In 2012, Komen founder and CEO Nancy Brinker became the focus of controversy when she announced Komen would be pulling the grants the organization had been providing to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings, then quickly reversed that decision. Several months later Brinker announced she would be stepping down as Komen's CEO, but the following year she was again the focus of controversy when news outlets reported that not only did she still hold her CEO position, but she had received a hefty raise to boot that brought her annual compensation up to $684,000 per year: In early 2012, Komen announced it was pulling its grants for breast-cancer screenings from Planned Parenthood, drawing an immediate backlash from Komen supporters and abortion rights advocates. Within days, Nancy Brinker, the groups founder and CEO, reversed the decision to defund the organization. Then, in August, Brinker announced that she would be stepping down. But 10 months later, Brinker still holds her position and tax documents reveal that she received a 64 percent raise and now makes $684,000 a year, according to the charitys latest available tax filing. Komen says the raise came in November 2010, prior to last year's controversy. Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, which evaluates and rates charities, called Brinker's salary "extremely high." "This pay package is way outside the norm," he said. "It's about a quarter of a million dollars more than what we see for charities of this size. This is more than the head of the Red Cross is making, for an organization that is one-tenth the size of the Red Cross." The American Red Cross had revenue of about $3.4 billion, while Komens was about $340 million last year. Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern makes $500,000, according to the most recent financial documents available for the charity. Charity Navigator's last compensation figure for Nancy Brinker was $560,896 per year, which at the time put her below Komen president Elizabeth Thompson's reported annual compensation of $606,461. In June 2013, Komen finally announced that Brinker would be stepping down as president and CEO of that organization and named Judith A. Salerno, M.D. as her successor. In June 2015, Brinker reportedly resigned from her paid position to assume an unpaid role role as a top volunteer with Komen. Dr. Salerno's most recently reported compensation (in August 2017) was $479,858, while Nancy Brinker was still listed as a "founder" receiving a salary of $397,093. compensation announced unpaid In September 2017, Paula Schneider took over as president and CEO of Komen, with compensation of $137,155 reported as of the end of the fiscal year in March 2018. Paula Schneider The reference to Komen's applying only 20% of donated money to breast cancer research likely comes from a pie chart displayed in the "Use of Funds" section of Wikipedia's article about Susan G. Komen for the Cure, which showed Komen's 2009-2010 Expenses: Use of Funds While it may have been true that breast cancer research comprised only a 21% share of Komen's program expenses (Charity Navigator puts the figure at 28.8% as of March 2018), citing that figure as a criticism of the organization reflects a common misbelief that groups dedicated to addressing particular diseases (e.g., the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the ALS Association) exist solely or primarily to fund and direct research into curing and/or preventing those diseases. This perception is inaccurate: Komen and other groups like it have goals that include delivering a wide array of services to the communities they support beyond the funding of research, such as funding educational awareness and outreach programs, providing screening and diagnostic procedures, and arranging medical treatment and home care for persons currently living with those diseases. A more relevant metric for assessing a charity's overall financial effectiveness is the percentage of the organization's budget that is actually spent on all the programs and services the charity delivers, and in this area the Charity Navigator charity evaluation site gives Komen an 80.3 rating (as well as a 96.0 rating for Accountability & Transparency). Charity Navigator does rank many other breast cancer charities higher than Susan G. Komen for the Cure, however. Komen breast cancer Regarding the seemingly excessively high level of CEO salaries at some charities, Charity Navigator advises that: advises While there are certainly some charities that overpay their leaders, Charity Navigator's data shows that those organizations are the minority. Among the charities we've evaluated (those being mid to large-sized charities), the typical CEO's annual compensation is in the low to mid six figures. Before you make any judgments about salaries higher or lower than that range, we encourage you to keep in mind that these charities are complex organizations, with multi-million dollar budgets, hundreds of employees, and thousands of constituents. These leaders could inevitably make much more running similarly sized for-profit firms. Furthermore, when making your decision it is important to consider that it takes a certain level of professionalism to effectively run a charity and charities must offer a competitive salary if they want to attract and retain that level of leadership. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3262 | 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: Missing Child: Devon Ward Claim summaries: A 14-year-old boy named Devon Ward who went missing from his Horseheads, New York, home has been found safe.
contextual information: My son Devon Ward never came home from school today. He skipped his last class after lunch, and nobody's heard from him since. Cell phone is going right to voice mail. He is 14, about 5 foot 7, and probably wearing a black jacket. If everyone shares this on their pages, i am sure we will find someone who saw him this afternoon /evening or know his current whereabouts... call 607-358-5055. According to Binghamton, New York, radio station WHWK: Lisa Davis of Horseheads is searching for her 14 year old son Devon Ward who she says may be on his way to Pennsylvania. According to Lisa, Devon skipped his last class after lunch at Horseheads High School [on April 17] and hasn't been heard from since. Lisa says her husband checked the local hospital and notified both village police and New York State Troopers of their son's disappearance. Devon is said to be about 5 foot 7 and most likely wearing a black jacket. When I asked Lisa whether she believed there were a chance that her son had decided to simply run away, she said her son isn't the type of kid to just run away, but that she was told he might be headed to Pennsylvania. I spoke the the Chemung County Sheriff's Office who confirmed that this is an active case. They referred me to Horseheads Police Department where I was told Devon's case is a State Police case. I spoke with Trooper Lewis at the State Police office who didn't divulge any information but confirmed that Devon has been reported missing and that State Troopers are on the case. If you've seen Devon Ward or know where he is, please contact the New York State Troopers at 607-739-8797. On the evening of 18 April 2013, Devon's mother indicated on her Facebook page that Devon had been located safe: Facebook We found Devon. He is safe and sound at the police barracks in Horseheads. Thank you to everyone who helped spread the word. We greatly appreciate all the help and support. We have such a wonderful community!! Please share the status, so that people know he's been found. Taylor, Traci. "14 Year Old Missing from Horseheads, May Be Headed to Pennsylvania."
WHWK Radio 18 April 2013. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3263 | 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: Stanford Study Proves Election Fraud through Exit Poll Discrepancies Claim summaries: Two researchers released a paper (not a study) examining whether primary election fraud that favored Hillary Clinton had occurred.
contextual information: On 8 June 2016, the Facebook page "The Bern Report" shared a document authored by researchers Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan of Stanford University suggesting that "the outcomes of the 2016 Democratic Party nomination contest [are not] completely legitimate: That social media share described the document as "a fantastic research piece put together by a couple of college students, Rodolfo Cortes Barragan & Axel Geijsel." That document (properly termed a "paper," not a "study," as the latter term implies some form of professional vetting) concluded with the statement that the data examined by its author "suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election" and that "this fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders": document Are the results we are witnessing in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive. At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate? We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging evidence for this claim. First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama. As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support. In an appendix, Geijsel and Barragan stated that their research was still in progress and had not yet been subject to peer review, but since the information was highly topical they believed it better to pre-release their findings due to the ongoing primary ballot count in California (among other factors): Statement on peer-review: We note that this article has not been officially peer-reviewed in a scientific journal yet. Doing so will take us several months. As such, given the timeliness of the topic, we decided to publish on the Bern Report after we received preliminary positive feedback from two professors (both experts in the quantitative social sciences). We plan on seeking peer-reviewed publication at a later time. As of now, we know there may be errors in some numbers (one has been identified and sent to us: it was a mislabeling). We encourage anyone to let us know if they find any other error. Our aim here truly is to understand the patterns of results, and to inspire others to engage with the electoral system. The post-introduction portion of the paper began with a comparison of outcomes in "primary states with paper trails and without paper trails," holding that potentially inaccurate results led the researchers to "restrict [our] analysis to a proxy: the percentage of delegates won by Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders." After identifying via the Ballotpedia web site 18 states that use a form of paper verification for votes compared to 13 states without such a "paper trail," they concluded that states without "paper trails" demonstrated a higher rate of support for Hillary Clinton: Analysis: The [data] show a statistically significant difference between the groups. States without paper trails yielded higher support for Secretary Clinton than states with paper trails. As such, the potential for election fraud in voting procedures is strongly related to enhanced electoral outcomes for Secretary Clinton. In the Appendix, we show that this relationship holds even above and beyond alternative explanations, including the prevailing political ideology and the changes in support over time. The information included in the Appendix didn't explicate exactly what those alternative explanations might be: Are there other variables that could account for our main effect (states without paper trails going overwhelmingly for Clinton)? We conducted a regression model and included the % of Non-Hispanic Whites in a state as of the last Census, the states electoral history from 1992 to 2012 of favoring Democratic or Republican nominees for President (i.e., the blueness of a state), and our variable of interest: paper trail vs. no paper trail. As expected, race/ethnicity and political ideology played a role: The Whiter and more liberal a state, the less it favored Clinton. However, the effect for paper trail remains significant. States with paper trails show significantly less support for Clinton. As such, even beyond the potential for other likely factors to play a role, the potential for fraud is associated with gains for Clinton. Dependent variable: Percent support for Clinton in the primaries In the paper's second portion, the researchers examined discrepancies between exit polls and final results by state, a subject of debate (hashtagged #ExitPollGate on social media) that antedated the publication of their paper and was addressed in a Nation article disputing the claim that exit polls revealed fraud. The Nation's analysis held that fraud detection exit polling varied significantly from the type of exit polling typically carried out in the United States: While exit polls are used to detect potential fraud in some countries, ours arent designed, and arent accurate enough, to accomplish that purpose. [A polling company VP], who has conducted exit polls in fragile democracies like Ukraine and Venezuela, explained that there are three crucial differences between their exit polls and our own. Polls designed to detect fraud rely on interviews with many more people at many more polling places, and they use very short questionnaires, often with just one or two questions, whereas ours usually have twenty or more. Shorter questionnaires lead to higher response rates. Higher response rates paired with larger samples result in much smaller margins of error. Theyre far more precise. But it costs a lot more to conduct that kind of survey, and the media companies that sponsor our exit polls are only interested in providing fodder for pundits and TV talking heads. All they want to know is which groups came out to vote and why, so thats what they pay for. As well, standard exit polling conducted in the U.S. can be very inaccurate and systematically biased for a number of reasons, including: including o Differential nonresponse, in which the supporters of one candidate are likelier to participate than those of another candidate. Exit polls have limited means to correct for nonresponse, since they can weight only by visually identifiable characteristics. Hispanic origin, income and education, for instance, are left out. o Cluster effects, which happen when the precincts selected arent representative of the overall population. This is a very big danger in state exit polls, which include only a small number of precincts. As a result, exit polls have a larger margin of error than an ordinary poll of similar size. These precincts are selected to have the right balance of Democratic and Republican precincts, which isnt so helpful in a primary. o Absentee voters arent included at all in states where they represent less than 20 percent or so of the vote. As the New York Times put it, "[N]o one who studies the exit polls believes that they can be used as an indicator of fraud in the way the conspiracy theorists do." Nonetheless, Geijsel and Barragan contended in their paper that: Anomalies exist between exit polls and final results Data procurement: We obtained exit poll data from a database kept by an expert on the American elections. Analysis: On the overall, are the exit polls different from the final results? Yes they are. The data show lower support for Secretary Clinton in exit polls than the final results would suggest. While an effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the Secretary in the hours following the exit polls. The expert whose numbers were utilized for the paper wasn't expressly cited by name, but his moniker appeared on the linked spreadsheet: Richard Charnin. Charnin indeed lists some impressive statistical credentials on his personal blog, but he also appears to expend much of his focus on conspiracy theories related to the JFK assassination (which raises the question of whether his math skills outstrip his ability to apply skeptical reasoning to data). spreadsheet conspiracy theories Geijsel addressed questions about exit poll numbers in a subsequent e-mail to a blogger who was highly skeptical of his research: skeptical In short, exit polling works using a margin of error, you will always expect it to be somewhat off the final result. This is often mentioned as being the margin of error, often put at 95%, it indicates that there's a 95% chance that the final result will lie within this margin. In exit polling this is often calculated as lying around 3%. The bigger the difference, the smaller the chance that the result is legitimate. This is because although those exit polls are not 100% accurate, they're accurate enough to use them as a reference point. In contrast to the idea that probably 1 out of 20 results will differ. Our results showed that (relatively) a huge amount of states differed. This would lead to two possibilities, a) the Sanders supporters are FAR more willing to take the exit polls, or b) there is election fraud at play. Considering the context of these particular elections, we believe it's the latter. Though that's our personal opinion, and others may differ in that, we believe we can successfully argue for that in a private setting considering the weight of our own study, the beliefs of other statisticians who have both looked at our own study (and who have conducted corroborating studies), and the fact that the internet is littered with hard evidence of both voter suppression and election fraud having taken place. That blogger passed the anlysis on to his father ("a retired Professor Emeritus in Mathematics and Applied Statistics at the University of Northern Colorado"), Donald T. Searls, Ph.D., for comment: comment I simply asked him to review it in full and send me his comments as to its methodology and his view as to its validity. For the record, he has been a Republican for as long as I can recall and has no interest in voting for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be. I received his response via e-mail today. Here is what he wrote: I like the analysis very much up to the point of applying probability theory. I think the data speak for itself (themselves). It is always problematic to apply probability theory to empirical data. Theoretically unknown confounding factors could be present. The raw data is in my mind very powerful and clear on its own. My personal opinion is that the whole process has been rigged against Bernie at every level and that is devastating even though I don't agree with him. I called him after receiving his response to [ask him to] clarify his remarks on the application of probability theory to the data. His comment to me was that he did not believe it was necessary for the authors to take that step. If he had done the study himself, he would not have bothered with doing so. As he said, the data speaks for itself. Although Geijsel cited a number of sources to substantiate the claim that fraud was well-documented in the 2016 primary season, most of those citations involved persons with an interest in the overall dispute (such as groups party to lawsuits). That factor doesn't necessarily cast doubt on the researchers' findings, but it highlights that not much independent and neutral verification of their conclusions has occurred yet. Cohn, Nate. "Exit Polls, And Why The Primary Was Not Stolen From Bernie Sanders."
27 June 2016. Geijsel, Axel and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan. "Are We Witnessing a Dishonest Election?"
7 June 2016. Holland, Joshua. "Reminder: Exit-Poll Conspiracy Theories Are Totally Baseless."
The Nation. 7 June 2016. Booman Tribune. "My Dad's View of Election Fraud Study."
11 June 2016. Booman Tribune. "Election Fraud Study Authors Respond."
13 June 2016. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3264 | 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: Complimentary lifetime access to fast food. Claim summaries: Popular fast food outlets aren't giving away free lifetime passes to celebrate their anniversaries. Such offers are survey scams.
contextual information: In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook): As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information.Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3265 | 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 62°C Temperatures in Kuwait Cause Trees to Burst into Flames? Claim summaries: Despite a series of images showing melted street lights and trees on fire, the temperature in Kuwait has not reached 143.6F.
contextual information: In July 2017, social media users shared videos and images of burning trees and melting streetlights, the purported results of a record-breaking heatwave in Kuwait during which temperatures soared to 62 Celsius (143.6 Fahrenheit). First of all, a 62 Celsius day has never been recorded. The highest temperature on record, according to the World Meteorological Organization, was 56.7C (134F) on 10 July 1913 in Furnace Creek, California. The highest temperature in Kuwait, 54C, was recorded in Mitrabah in July 2016. Although the footage of trees burning is likely real, the claim that these fires were caused by 62 Celsius temperatures is unfounded. temperature recorded The weather in Kuwait hovered around 50C during July 2017: hovered The web site Frontnews.eu shared one of the most popular videos of this claim, showing a tree burning on the side of the road along with the report that the temperature had reached 62C in Kuwait: shared In Kuwait, the air temperature in some places reached 62 degrees Celsius in an open area where there is no shadow. Users of social networks share videos of burning trees, bushes, and also note that because of the heat, gasoline in the car tanks exploded. This video was actually shot in Madinah, Saudi Arabia, and captured a palm tree that was struck by lightning, as the website alweeam.com reported (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity): actually Madinah struck A thunderbolt struck a palm tree on the famous Sultana Street in Madinah. Following the heavy rains in the region today and some of its provinces, the fire broke out in the entire palm before the civil defense fire brigade began its work. A video clip was documented by a citizen. The burning process started gradually with the burning palm tree, and quickly spread to the whole of the surrounding area, causing danger to the firefighters before the fire brigade put out the fire in the palm and the surrounding trees. . . A second video purported to show a plant burning due to Kuwait's high temperatures: Although this video was shot in Kuwait, we found no evidence to suggest that the plant burst into flame solely because of high air temperatures. Local news reports (translated by Google Translate and edited for clarity) noted the cause of the fire was unknown: reports Firefighters extinguished a fire in a number of trees on the first ring road near the Martyr's Park. In the details, a report was sent to the operating room stating that a fire broke out on the first ring road. The Shuwaikh industrial fire station was called and the fire was extinguished. Firefighters are currently investigating. . . . A photograph of a melting traffic light also appeared alongside the claim about the high temperatures: alongside Although this image was taken in Kuwait, it dated back to 2013 and showed a street light that reportedly melted due to a nearby car fire. 2013 reportedly One final image was circulated as "evidence" that temperatures had reached 62C in Kuwait: According to the Kuwait Times, however, this image was manipulated. Meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, explained that the temperature has never reached 62C in Kuwait and that such reports were just "fake news": explained Do not believe in fake news, warned meteorologist Adel Al-Saadoun, head of the Fintas Weather Observatory, as he debunked social media reports that temperatures in Kuwait reached 62 degrees. It is fake news not true, Saadoun told Kuwait Times. Kuwait has only recorded temperatures of a maximum of 52 degrees centigrade. Never in history has the temperature in Kuwait reached 62. As we speak now, the temperature is 49 degrees Celsius (at 2 pm yesterday), but people have been posting images of 54, 56 degrees the temperature inside the car is higher, but not as per our weather monitoring system. Saadoun said the mercury will continue to rise in the next few days till the end of July, but by the beginning of August, the heat will start subsiding. This has been the usual weather in Kuwait. This period is called the summer solstice. This is the period when the sun is right next to us up there, and we expect such weather in July, he said. World Meteorological Organization. "High Temperatures and Extreme Weather Continue."
7 July 2017. Chand, Eudore. "Shrubs, Palm in GCC on Fire Due to Heat? Watch Videos."
Emirates 247. 7 August 2017. Garcia, Ben. "62 Degrees Centigrade Temperature Untrue, Fake News."
Kuwait Times. 2 July 2017. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3266 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: An influential French blogger has come in for heavy criticism after thousands of antisemitic, threatening and homophobic tweets he published under a pseudonym resurfaced over the weekend, sparking fierce debate. [The tweets included threats against Front National leader Marine Le Pen, who he threatened to kill, but their author Medhi Meklat, 24, and his supporters have shrugged them off as a joke. “I am going to slit your throat Muslim style†read the tweet threatening Le Pen. Another called for “Hitler to kill all the Jews†while a third said he wanted to “rape†former Charlie Hebdo Charb, one of the victims of the January 2015 terror attacks, with a “Laguiole knifeâ€. The tweets were published under the pseudonym ‘Marcelin Deschamps’ described by Meklat as a “shameful†“fictional character†whose thoughts were “quite the opposite†of his own. †But they remained on the account after Meklat switched it to his name in 2015. This weekend they were outed by a fellow Twitter user who was outraged after seeing Meklat on TV promoting his new book, Le Monde has reported. On Saturday Meklat cleaned the account, deleting around 50, 000 tweets spanning back over a number of years to leave just 503 remaining. He also used the platform to issue an apology, writing “I’m sorry if these tweets shocked some of you. they are obsolete†adding “through Marcelin Deschamps, I was questioning the notion of excess and provocation. †But his claims have not convinced everyone. The secularist organisation Printemps Republicain [Republican Spring] have slammed the tweets as “serious†and “within the scope of the lawâ€. They have accused the media of bearing some responsibility for the tweets, having “promoted†and “praised†Meklat. Had he been a member of France’s National Front, they said, Meklat “would have been instantly and quite rightly pilloried by the same media, and would certainly have found himself in court†they added in a statement. And they dismissed claims that Meklat, under the pseudonym Deschamps, was acting satirically in the same vein as the provocative magazine Charlie Hebdo arguing that Meklat had “only attacked certain categories of people [ … ] Charlie Hebdo attacks everyone. †Born in the notorious Paris suburb of where riots have recently been raging, Meklat gained prominence through his writing for the Bondy Blog, a blog set up following the 2005 Paris riots and financed by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Lauded as the authentic voice of France’s migrant communities, Meklat has capitalised on his media exposure to escape the banlieues, spending summers aboard yatchs in Los Angeles, and networking with esteemed institutions such as the Cartier Foundation to work on joint projects. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3267 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Megyn Kelly — breakout star of the 2016 presidential campaign, anchor of the “The Kelly File†on Fox News, current object of employment desire for multiple networks, author, mother, wife, daughter and friend (the last four being how she describes herself) — has something she wants everyone to know. Really. A lot. Listen up. Not just that it is dangerous when Donald J. Trump calls out a single citizen on social media, seemingly giving permission to his followers to turn into rabid attack dogs, although she knows firsthand what that is like, having been the original target of his wrath for almost a year, starting in August 2015. Not just that hard work and an unsparing sense of your own strengths and weaknesses (and those of other people) can put you in a good place, though she writes about that a lot in her book, which is called, naturally, “Settle for More,†a catchphrase she also drops strategically into conversation. But also (and this may seem but it is not) that she in no way apologizes for wearing that dress to the Republican National Convention in July. You know, the one that sent the internet into what she called a “meltdown†because it revealed a whole lot of … shoulder! And thus, was unlike any dress that had been seen on a serious anchor ever, except maybe at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Definitely never behind a desk. “It was a lovely dress,†she said — this in a car during a brief respite back home in New York between book tour stops. “A convention is a kind of extravaganza, and there are certain settings where you can take risks. So I just thought: ‘Yes, I can do this. I can be smart and challenging while I wear spaghetti straps, and everyone is just going to have to get their heads around that. ’†Just to prove it, she has worn it again. Because, she said, “I felt very strongly, I was not going to be defined by what someone else deemed appropriate. †Indeed, for the past few years, ever since Ms. Kelly, 46, began making a name for herself as the person willing to call out power players on their own contradictions, contortions (verbal and ) and she has become famous for refusing to be boxed in by anyone else’s “appropriateâ€: not her network’s, nor a political party’s, nor the mythical dos and don’ts of career girl dress. She took on Newt Gingrich over his “anger issues†in October, sparred with the Republican Svengali Karl Rove over his electoral math in 2012 and challenged the conservative radio host Mike Gallagher over his dismissal of maternity leave. These moments have become widely known as “Megyn Moments,†so named by Jim Rutenberg, media columnist for The New York Times, in a profile last year. But what has been less widely acknowledged is that they extend far beyond her reports and interviews at the anchor desk into a broader statement about how women should be able to frame their gender. Put simply, she doesn’t just say what she wants. She wears what she wants. “You cannot underestimate the effect of that,†said Tammy Haddad, chief executive of Haddad Media and a former MSNBC political director. “Her personal image and her business image are one and the same. The intensity she brings to her work, she brings to her look, and she doesn’t allow it to get in her way. That’s good for all women. And it is completely different from what came before. †For years, industry wisdom suggested that a female anchor, like many female executives, should dress like her male colleagues: in a suit, with a dark jacket and blouse. See, for example, Barbara Walters and Diane Sawyer. In 1996, when MSNBC began, Katie Couric donned a beige jacket and black turtleneck for the debut broadcast by 2006, when she became the first woman to solo anchor the “CBS Evening News,†she had loosened up enough to wear a white jacket and black . This has, admittedly, changed, with the brightly colored and sometime patterned sleeveless sheath dress currently a favorite of newswomen such as Mika Brzezinski of “Morning Joe†and Gayle King, of “CBS This Morning. †However, the fact that Ms. Kelly is on at 9 p. m. rather than during breakfast puts her choices in a different category, Ms. Haddad said: “She is talking to the audience, the critical audience. †And what she is telling them, Ms. Kelly said, is “that, within reason, they can make their own choices about how they look and how they act. †“I do think there is a new archetype for women emerging that rejects the bounds that have been placed on them,†she added. A 1992 profile of Ms. Sawyer in Vanity Fair, for example, subtitled, “How she finally beat the glamour rap. †Ms. Kelly, who appeared on the magazine’s cover last February, only the second female newscaster to do so, has no problem with the glamour rap. In part because she doesn’t ignore it. Describing the haircut she got before the second Republican debate, for example, when she was deep in her Trump war and decided to lop her waves into a crop, Ms. Kelly quite cheerfully took a invitation and turned it into a taunt — thus owning the vulgarity and weaponizing what might otherwise have seemed a mere beauty decision. In her book she writes that when she went to meet Mr. Trump for the first time since their public tussle to discuss having him do an interview with her, she wore her favorite black sheath Gucci dress. “I feel strong in it,†she said. By acknowledging the role clothes play in her own life and psyche, she is contravening one of the last taboos: If women want to be taken seriously, they are not supposed to take fashion seriously. A patently idiotic idea. (If you want to be taken seriously, you had better think seriously about every message you are sending, including the ones in your outfits.) In this she is part of a handful of women in the public eye who are breaking that rule, including Michelle “no sleeves†Obama and Sheryl “no hoodies†Sandberg. “We talk about it a lot: What is the world we are trying to create for our daughters — she has one, I have two — and how we can move things forward?†said Debra Netschert, a managing director of Jennison Associates, an asset management firm, who has been friends with Ms. Kelly for about four years. It is not a coincidence that in 2010, when Ms. Kelly moved from the morning show “America’s Newsroom†to become of the afternoon show “America Live,†she hired her own stylist. Generally, the Fox anchors use the Fox stylist, just as they use the Fox hair and makeup people, which is why there is what is generally known as a “Fox Lookâ€: for women, clingy brightly colored dresses that “pop†on TV, tousled hair and a lot of eye makeup, lip gloss and base. But, she said, that means “we all sort of look the same. †When she started in TV after a career as a lawyer, she wore mostly navy, black and gray suits, and pinstripes — a “lot of Ann Taylor and Theory†— but then Fox put her in its wardrobe, “which was weird, because I had never really worn color before,†she said. So when she got her own show, she said she decided “I wanted to define myself differently. †Which is to say, “as myself,†rather than as the network’s product. She enlisted the help of her neighbor, Dana Perriello, whom she knew first as a mom, but who had a sideline as a personal stylist. Because they were friends before they worked together, “She knew who I was,†Ms. Kelly said, and Ms. Perriello had an idea about how Ms. Kelly could express herself. They began to define a “Megyn look,†which had to do with clothes that were “strong, stylish, sleek, tailored, feminine, but not frilly,†Ms. Kelly said. “I don’t like frills. †“She wanted to be fashionable not just in the news world, but in any world,†said Ms. Perriello, who puts outfits together for Ms. Kelly — dress, shoes, jewelry — and sends her look books of everything . Now Ms. Kelly wears mostly dresses by Victoria Beckham, Stella McCartney, Roland Mouret and Narciso Rodriguez, though Ms. Perriello is increasingly adding separates (and sleeves). The dress was by Ralph Lauren. In the photograph for this article, Ms. Kelly wore a black Fendi stretch jersey dress and silver Jimmy Choo stilettos. Her color palette is once again dominated by black and white, with the occasional red and blue thrown in. She likes a cutout and a high spiked heel. She also likes leather and, Ms. Perriello said, “hardware. †She has recently been wearing a lot of asymmetrical cuts, “which is not very common in news,†Ms. Perriello said. What she does not wear is florals or anything too lacy. Also, “You will never catch me in a dress without a pair of Spanx and a bra,†Ms. Kelly said, and she is happy to explain why. In fact, she thinks it is good to explain why: “After three children, it all came back together, but it didn’t come back together the way it used to be. †Though earlier this year she said that she, along with many of her female colleagues, was sexually harassed by the former Fox News chief Roger Ailes, and though she writes about it in her book, all of that happened during her “frumpy suit period,†not during her later, more period. A fact she pointed out to underscore that such harassment was really about power and not . No woman is “asking for it†because of what she wears, and no woman should be judged for it, though judging — in a dismissive and derogatory way — is exactly what Ms. Kelly experienced earlier this year when Mr. Trump and assorted others resurfaced a 2010 GQ shoot of Ms. Kelly in a black slip and stilettos, draped over a chair. In January, @gene70 tweeted the photo with the message, “And this is the bimbo that’s asking presidential questions?†Mr. Trump retweeted it. Ms. Kelly was having none of it. “They tried to me!†she said. “But I think I looked great. I had just turned 40, and I was pregnant. Some people at Fox still think it was a mistake, but I refuse to have to dismiss these options because of other people’s prejudices, and my willingness to engage just proves they are wrong. †In other words, it was appropriate because Megyn Kelly said it was appropriate. Rhetorically, this is not unlike the argument Gloria Steinem used when someone told her at her 40th birthday that she didn’t look 40. Ms. Steinem responded: “This is what 40 looks like. †Ms. Kelly, however, may not like the comparison. She has regularly refused to categorize herself as a feminist, because she thinks it is nichifying. She also rejects descriptions such as “pioneer†and “trailblazer,†and says, “You don’t want to get drunk on your own wine,†and, “I’m just trying to be authentic. †The irony is, insisting on her femininity while also insisting on her due — that she can have her career and her family, too, and in your face with a spaghetti strap if you don’t like that — may be the most authentically feminist act of all. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3268 | 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: Posts about a "loss" on 'Little People, Big World' are deceptive. Claim summaries: Strange rumors made the rounds around the end of 2021 and the beginning of 2022.
contextual information: On Jan. 4, 2022, a strange Facebook ad appeared that claimed: "The Sudden Loss That Hit 'Little People, Big World.'" It led to a lengthy article that claimed to reveal news of a death, "shocking truth," or some sort of sad development about the Roloff family. claimed However, this was all very misleading. For readers unfamiliar with "Little People, Big World," it's a reality TV show that follows the lives of the Roloff family. reality TV show "Matt and Amy Roloff, both 4 feet tall, face a variety of challenges in raising their four children: twins Jeremy and Zach, who is 2-feet shorter than his brother, and younger siblings Molly and Jacob, who like Jeremy are average height," a synopsis on TheTVDB.com reads. "The family's 34-acre Oregon farm serves as part playground and part moneymaker. As the series ages, Matt and Amy deal with personal strife, embrace their kids getting older and leading lives of their own, become grandparents, and attempt to keep Roloff Farms operational." synopsis The show began airing on TLC in 2006 and is often referred to by the acronym, "LPBW." Matt and Amy divorced in 2015. airing on TLC divorced In the Facebook ad about the Roloff family's "sudden loss," the caption contained several grammatical errors. It said: "Since the allegation were confirmed to the public, the cast of 'Little People, Big World' has ask for some privacy. Here is all the information given to the public so far." In other words, the ad appeared to imply that there were recent developments about a death that involved someone on "LPBW" or in the Roloff family. This strange Facebook ad came from a page named P-15897-2. The ad was posted on a Facebook page with a strange name: P-15897-2. It was described as a "clothing store." However, the truth was that this was nothing more than a quickly-created page that was being used to profit off of tragic and outdated news. It was likely managed from outside of the U.S. One of the photos showed a young Zach Roloff in a hospital bed. The picture was a screenshot from a 2006 episode of "LPBW" named "Zach's Emergency" where he experienced a "mysterious illness." episode The ad led to a lengthy slideshow-style article on foodisinthehouse.com. Its headline read: "Little People, Big World: Learn the Shocking Truth About the Roloff Family." article However, the Facebook ad and this article were both misleading. The story was nothing more than an extremely long history of the Roloff family. It mentioned several tragic developments. Matt had a brother named Josh who died at the age of 34 in 1999. He had experienced multiple medical problems since his birth, according to a report. Additionally, the story mentioned the August 2021 death of Felix, who was Amy's dog. She posted about his passing on Instagram. This news, which was reported by People.com and others, was around four months old by the time the misleading article was published and the Facebook ad went live. There's no evidence that the family asked "for privacy" about either of these two past deaths, as the Facebook ad claimed. report posted reported by People.com The lengthy article also documented two unrelated, sad developments about Dr. Jennifer Arnold, the star of the former TLC series, "The Little Couple." According to Chron.com, the show provided a "deeper look into the married life of Dr. Jen Arnold and Bill Klein, who happen to be dwarfs." According to Chron.com In 2013, Today.com reported that Dr. Arnold was "diagnosed with stage 3 choriocarcinoma, a rare cancer that began with a September pregnancy loss." reported In sum, an unknown person was paying Facebook to display an ad about "Little People, Big World" that seemed to indicate there were new and tragic developments. It said that the Roloff family asked "for privacy" and hinted with the words "so far" that more information was coming about a recent "loss" or death. However, this was misleading and appeared to be little more than an attempt to profit from past tragedies from two TLC TV shows. For these reasons, we have rated this claim as "Outdated." attempt to profit Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with lots of pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. submit ads to us | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3269 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Tune in to the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR) for another LIVE broadcast of The Boiler Room tonight 6:00 PM PST | 8:00 PM CST | 9:00 PM EST for this special broadcast. Join us for uncensored, uninterruptible talk radio, custom-made for bar fly philosophers, misguided moralists, masochists, street corner evangelists, media-maniacs, savants, political animals and otherwise lovable rascals.Join ACR hosts Hesher and Spore along with Miles of Truth, Randy J and Basil Valentine (21WIRE & ACR contributors) for the hundred and twelfth episode of BOILER ROOM. Turn it up, tune in and hang with the ACR Brain-Trust for this weeks boil downs and analysis and the usual gnashing of the teeth of the political animals in the social reject club.This week on the show we re getting a lesson in the UK political process as well as real time monitoring of the election as it develops with Basil Valentine and Miles of Truth calling in from the UK. We examine the updates in the story of Omran Daqneesh (formerly referred to as Syria boy and/or Dusty boy ), more US airstrikes in Syria and a look at some technocratic police state and data collection technology that are anything but benign to freedom and privacy.Listen to Boiler Room #112 UK Election, Omran & Technocratic Tech on Spreaker.Direct Download Episode #112Please like and share the program and visit our donate page to get involved! Reference Links: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3270 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A Kenyan government watchdog said on Friday it was investigating whether police had assaulted students during protests this week at the University of Nairobi over the detention of an opposition lawmaker. Police fired tear gas on Thursday at the protesting students. Video footage posted on social media later in the day showed uniformed officers outside dormitories and inside classrooms using batons to hit people who did not appear to be involved in the campus protests. It was the latest crackdown by police on protests since an Aug. 8 presidential election that was later annulled by the Supreme Court. A re-run of the vote has been set for Oct. 26. The Independent Police Oversight Authority (IPOA) this morning noted from social media reports of an incident in which members of the National Police Service allegedly stormed the University of Nairobi and assaulted students at the institution, the authority said on its Twitter feed. It requested that any member of the public come forward to provide information to aid the investigation. The students had been protesting against the re-arrest of a lawmaker, Paul Ongili Owino, on Wednesday, shortly after he was released on bail on charges of subversion for calling President Uhuru Kenyatta a son of a dog at a campaign rally. Kenya is a key Western ally in a region often roiled by violence. Preparations for the re-run of the election are being closely monitored for signs of instability, after at least 28 people were killed in unrest following the Aug. 8 vote. The IPOA watchdog was created in 2011, after police came under severe criticism for the number of protesters killed during demonstrations against disputed elections in 2007. The violence then killed around 1,2000 people. But local and international rights groups say the institution is struggling to fulfill its mandate to investigate allegations of police brutality in a country rife with reports from civilians of extrajudicial killings by security forces. The IPOA has secured two convictions of police officers in the four years it has been operational. The watchdog pledged last month to fast-track investigations into high-profile deaths such as that of a baby allegedly killed by police in the violence after the election. [L4N1L34FC] But people familiar with the status of these investigations say the police are not cooperating with them, and that senior officials in the police force and the interior ministry insist officers killed only thieves and thugs. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3271 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: JERUSALEM — Speaking to Breitbart News during a trip to Israel, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee hailed President Donald Trump’s historic trip to Israel and urged the president to fulfil his campaign promise to move the U. S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem despite pressure against such a move. [“I think this is a historic trip,†said Huckabee. “He made the first ever flight from Riyadh to Tel Aviv. We had the first sitting U. S. president go to the Western Wall and offer a prayer. I think that is incredibly significant. †Huckabee said that Trump has been “very vocal in his support for Israel and I think that the people here sense it. †Continued Huckabee: I also hope with all my heart that he will keep his campaign promise to move the U. S. embassy. I know there is enormous pressure for him not to do that. The rationale is that it will make certain people unhappy. Whoever those people are, they are unhappy already. They are not going to be made happy by the location of the U. S. embassy. Huckabee said Trump’s visits to Israel and Saudi Arabia have demonstrated that a “very strong America is much better than a weak America. This is so incredibly different from the eight years of Barack Obama’s administration. †“The reception that Trump received in Saudi Arabia was a stunning contrast to the one received by Barack Obama,†he continued. “In Obama, they [the Saudis] saw a weak American leader, whereas with Trump they see someone who exhibits strength. Whose strength in leadership is out front. They might not have agreed with everything that Trump said [in his address in Saudi Arabia] but they have to respect that he spoke the truth. †Huckabee, who ran against Trump in the 2016 presidential election before endorsing him, is in Israel on a brief tour with American activist Dr. Joseph Frager. On Sunday night, Huckabee and Frager went for a nighttime visit to Joseph’s Tomb, Judaism’s third holiest site, located in a complex controlled by the Palestinian Authority. “It’s an amazing experience to have to come to this type of difficulty just to be able to come to a holy site for Jews and frankly even for Christians, who pay tribute to Joseph,†Huckabee said at the site, according to Ynetnews. “To have to do it in the dead of night, under armed guard, with the smell of tear gas in the air, burning tires along the route, it’s a stark reminder [of how different] it is in the heart of Israel, where the Israeli government protects every Muslim that accesses their holy site,†he added. “In Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] Jewish people do not have unhindered access to holy sites without having to go to extraordinary lengths in order to be able to access these places. †Huckabee will also attend the annual Moskowitz Prize for Zionism reception. The prize was “established in recognition of the people who put Zionism into action in today’s Israeli society — at times risking their own personal security, placing the collective before personal needs and doing what it takes to ensure a strong, secure Jewish homeland. †It was established by the late Irving Moskowitz, whose wife Cherna continues the family’s philanthropy. U. S. law requires the relocation of the embassy to Jerusalem. However, President Obama signed successive waivers delaying the move. The current waiver expires on June 1. Numerous reports in recent days cited White House officials saying that Trump is not expected to use the visit to announce an embassy move. Still, that prediction is subject to change. Even if Trump does not announce an embassy move, there are that could be put into place, including the possibility of David Friedman, the U. S. ambassador to Israel, setting up shop at the U. S. consulate in Jerusalem instead of the beachfront embassy building in Tel Aviv. 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. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3272 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Tweet Widget by Bryan K. Bullock
To read the foreign policy pages of the New York Times is to enter a world of whiteness. “Whites are the only ones who are presumed to have an opinion on such issues that is worth mentioning.” Although Black America is the nation’s most anti-imperial constituency, foreign policy is considered a white preserve. Blacks “serve the function we have always served: subjects of imperialism, scapegoats for repression, but not shapers of foreign policy.” Black American Anti-Imperialism: an Invisible Subject for the New York Times by Bryan K. Bullock
“From Vietnam through Iraq, African Americans have proved to be the group of Americans most opposed to U.S. military intervention.”
The October 4, 2016, issue of the New York Times , which contained the article, “Syrian War Magnifies Tension in America’s Global Mission,” is a case study in white supremacy. The article is framed from a totally white “conservative” and “liberal” frame, and completely ignores the perspective of African Americans, who, traditionally, and today, are consistently and overwhelmingly, anti-imperialism and who tend to identify with other Black and Brown people across the globe, including the Palestinians and Syrians.
The article purports to give “both sides” of the argument for U.S. intervention in the affairs of sovereign nations. The authors of the article give the impression that they are being “balanced” in giving the views of those who support America’s “mission” in the world and those who are “critical” of said “mission.” This false “balance” does not include the perspectives of any African American historians or critics of U.S. foreign policy, like Professor Gerald Horne, Bill Fletcher, Anthony Monteiro, Glen Ford or African (American) scholars like Horace Campbell. In fact, “both sides” of any debate in the U.S. regarding foreign policy, are both white “sides.” This is particularly true when it comes to U.S. foreign policy, where whites are the only ones who are presumed to either have an opinion on such issues, or one that is worth mentioning.
It is true that “both sides” could include Blacks who adhere to the Eurocentric, party-line views of the dominant U.S. narrators, say, Donna Brazile or Condoleezza Rice, or Blacks on the so-called “left,” but their views (still missing from this piece) are not a Black critique. It is a Eurocentric critique coming from a Black person, which is fundamentally different than an African American critique viewed through the lens of the African American experience. The ideas, views and critiques of Black thinkers are notoriously absent in the pages of the Times when it comes to foreign policy -- which proves that the writers, the editorial staff and the paper itself does not consider those views important. And in ignoring those critiques, it also ignores the historical critical analysis of the people who are and have been the subjects of U.S. foreign policy.
“The ideas, views and critiques of Black thinkers are notoriously absent in the pages of the Times when it comes to foreign policy.”
It also completely ignores the analysis of great Black historical thinkers like W.E.B. DuBois, Walter Rodney and Paul Robeson, Malcolm X, the late stage Martin Luther King, Jr., as well as the organizations they represented such as the Council on African Affairs (the CAA), the NAACP of the 1940’s, the African Liberation Support Committee, the Black Panther Party, The African Blood Brotherhood, the Organization of Afro-American Unity, Trans Africa, the U.S. Human Rights Network, the United Negro Improvement Association or the National Council of Black Lawyers, all of whom were deeply critical of America’s so-called mission in the world, especially as it related to African and Asian peoples, like Haitians, Congolese, Syrians, Yemenis and Palestinians. The critiques of these people are irrelevant to, not only the Times , but in truth, to the Democratic and Republican parties, the current incarnation of the NAACP, the Black Congressional Caucus, President Obama and most white liberal formations. However, this is not a reason to give the Times a pass. Even the use of the word “mission,” with the European habit of sending missionaries into Africa and the Americas to soften the people up with European religion before they were subdued by hard power, does not elicit irony on the part of the Times . The “white man’s burden” of “civilizing” the darker races of the world, through enslavement, destroying their religions, cultures, languages, colonizing their lands and resource and extracting their people and whisking them away to foreign lands to toil from birth to death for free, is just as important and essential a part of the history of “America’s Global Mission” as anything else mentioned in the piece.
The hand wringing of the mostly white imperialists on the “left” and on the right, regarding the proper way to engage in imperialism, is essentially what the piece presents. No other perspectives or voices are important or valid. Thus the perspectives of African American thinkers are only relevant in American discourse when it concerns “black” issues like police brutality, but not on international issues, although many black writers and thinkers would argue the two are connected. This is so even though the very presence people of African descent in America is a direct result of the United States’ foreign policy of capturing, importing and enslaving African people. This point is lost on white foreign policy writers. However, early Black thinkers were clear on this point. People like DuBois and Robeson, in the past, and contemporaries like Glen Ford, were/are, fiercely anti-imperialist.
“The perspectives of African American thinkers are only relevant in American discourse when it concerns ‘black’ issues like police brutality, but not on international issues.”
The white, imperialist presentation in the article excludes the ideas of Syrian Americans, Indigenous populations, Mexican and Puerto Rican Americans and Hawaiians, all of whom may have a totally different idea of America’s “obligation” in Syria. Penny M. Von Eschen notes in the book, Race Against Empire, Black Americans and Anticolonialism 1937-1957 , that “Objecting to U.S. support for South African and the European colonial powers, and increasingly challenging the notion that America was the legitimate leader of the ‘free world’ and therefore above censure, black Americans both criticized new directions in American foreign policy and attempted to use the United Nations as a forum in which to gain support for civil rights struggles in the United States.” African Americans are no less critical of America’s self-serving “mission” today as was then. African Americans were highly critical of the U.S.’s violent overthrow of the African nation of Libya, its aggressions toward Cuba in the 60’s and Venezuela in the Chavez era and today. We have not forgotten America’s refusal to recognize Haiti as an independent Black nation when it defeated the French. Nor are we unmindful of the U.S. invasion of Haiti in 1915 and its support of dictators of the Duvalier family, the coup of the Aristide government and the fact that President Obama tried to prevent Aristide from returning to Haiti.
Black thinkers on international issues are highly supportive of the Palestinian cause and troubled by the continued expansion of AFRICOM, the U.S. Africa Command, on the continent. This analysis is glaringly absent from mainstream media portrayals of America’s “duty” in the world. The Times article offers the view that, “Because many Americans see their foreign policy as a grand mission to make the world a better place, they tend to divide the world into heroes who support their ideals and villains who oppose them.” But which Americans are the writers talking about and whose “ideals” are represented in U.S. foreign policy. It is certain that the views of people like George Padmore, a leader in the Pan-African movement in the 40’s and 50’s, are not represented by this view. Padmore was clear that, “Empire and peace are incompatible.” Michael C. Dawson notes, in Blacks in and Out of the Left : “from Vietnam through Iraq, African Americans have proved to be the group of Americans most opposed to U.S. military intervention.” It is also purposely “forgotten” that the Black Panther Party was, following in the footsteps of their ideological predecessor, Malcolm X, staunchly anti-imperialist. As Eldridge Cleaver noted, the U.S. was “bankrolling and arming all of the oppressive regimes around the world.” One of the agenda items contained in the National Black Political Agenda, created in Gary, Indiana, in 1972 called for an end to the Vietnam War and the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops from Asia and Africa; the withdrawal of U.S. military, corporations, and communications facilities from southern Africa and the Third World; self-determination of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands; an end to sanctions against Cuba and the closure of the American military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
“African Americans were highly critical of the U.S.’s violent overthrow of the African nation of Libya, its aggressions toward Cuba in the 60’s and Venezuela in the Chavez era and today.”
Contemporary white American analysis of U.S. foreign excludes the historical reality that, in thinking of America’s support of so-called rebels in Syria and Libya , it is clear to African Americans that America never supported a single African liberation group in Africa. It is not lost on Black Americans that the African National Congress and Nelson Mandela were considered terrorists by the U.S. No African rebel movement seeking independence from the Dutch, British, French, German, Portuguese or Italian colonizers of African lands ever received a single drop of military support from Washington. The U.S. never supported the Mau Mau in Kenya, nor Frelimo in Mozambique, nor the ANC in South Africa, or any other revolutionary movement on the continent.
In fact, the contrary is true. From the coup against Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana to the assassination of Patrice Lumuumba in the Congo, to the capture of Nelson Mandela and to the support the racist apartheid system of South African and the murderous colonial regime in the former Rhodesia, the American government has consistently and forcefully opposed revolutionary movements in Africa and in fact supported their colonial oppressors. The only country to ever militarily support African liberation was Cuba, not the U.S. Regarding Mandela, (who the U.S. considered a terrorist) we heard him clearly when, in response to a request to condemn Fidel Castro, Yassar Arafat and Mommar Ghadifi, he said, your enemies are not necessarily our enemies. Indeed, not only did Castro send troops to aid the Angolans in defeating the South Africans, he also provided refuge for many African American freedom fighters, from Robert Williams to Assata Shakur. While the U.S. was infiltrating, surveilling and murdering Black political activists in the Black Panther Party, leaders of North Vietnam, China, Algeria and Cuba welcomed them as ambassadors of the African American community.
“It is clear to African Americans that America never supported a single African liberation group.”
Understanding this historical reality, Black thinkers are justifiably critical and suspicious of U.S. intentions in places like Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya. The greatest thinkers in African American culture explicitly made the connection between the U.S. and European colonialism abroad, in places like Syria, as an extension of the domestic policy of treating African Americans as second class citizens – or, as some African American thinkers have argued, the domestic colonization of Black people. The genocide of the Native Americans resonates with Black Americans. Leaders from MLK, who connected America’s imperialism in Vietnam, and the tax dollars used to support it, to the lack of financial resources available to be used to build cities and provide a basic wage; to Malcolm, who traveled the globe making personal connections with African heads of state, including Nasser in Egypt. It was Malcolm who saw the historic opportunity of the Bandung Conference, where 29 Asian and African, post-colonial nations, met to discuss their own fates independent of colonial powers, including the U.S.
Black American support for anti-imperialist movements did not find a space in the Times’ analysis of Syria. The writers and editorial staff at the Times are oblivious to the histories of the Third World peoples living in their midst. Therefore, for Black people who understand this history, they recognize articles like the one published in the Times as imperial propaganda pieces for global white supremacy. Yet, the Times , in that regard, is no different than any other white American newspaper, magazine or news program or politician. They all (even, or especially, the Black ones) present a Eurocentric worldview that excludes the ideas, histories and analysis of its black population. We are irrelevant. We serve the function we have always served: subjects of imperialism, scapegoats for repression, but not shapers of foreign policy. Blacks can nominally participate in the American experience, but only so long as we stay in our place and as long as we support the “manifest destiny” of the global hegemon and not get in its way. We are cannon fodder for the imperialist wars abroad and casualties in the U.S. war on drugs and on poor Black life at home.
“Malcolm traveled the globe making personal connections with African heads of state, including Nasser in Egypt.”
The presence of a black face at the head of the empire has provided cover for U.S. imperialism in Africa and Asia, but it has not diminished the anti-imperialism of the black community. It has silenced the voices of the self-appointed black “leaders” and revealed them to be supporters of empire and oppression. The Times , too, or rather again, reveals itself as a supporter of the Pentagon by publishing an article that is short on true analysis of America’s support of terrorists in Syria, as well as presenting a limited, white supremacist parameter of debate. Although the African American tradition of anti-imperialism may not be important to the Times , it is a tradition that is still alive nonetheless. And neither the Black face of the empire, nor the white press in service to it, can diminish it. Our antagonism against imperialism may not be publicized in the pages of the Times , but it lives on in our continued support for amnesty for Assata Shakur, the release of all political prisoners from Leonard Peltier to Jalil Muntiquim and Oscar Rivera Lopez, to support for Palestinian self-determination, to opposition to the re-colonization of Africa by America’s Africa Command, to the growing support by Black athletes, young and old, of Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the National Anthem, to our opposition to all U.S. wars of aggression, including the ones in Libya and Syria. African Americans’ opposition to the U.S. supported aggression in Syria, masquerading as humanitarian support, is obviously irrelevant to the Times , but Malcolm X told us plainly years ago, that the media would have us thinking the good guy was the bad guy and vice versa. So whether, or even if, Assad is a “ruthless dictator,” the term the U.S. has used against everyone from Castro to Chavez, it does not therefore mean that African Americans agree that the U.S. has the right to support insurrection in Syria. We know imperialism is Euro-American, white, capitalist venture that is carried against “the darker nations,” not for them. Malcolm, Martin and Mandela taught us well. Attorney Bryan K. Bullock practices law in Merrillville, Indiana. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3273 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. President Donald Trump has chosen Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a conservative health policy expert with deep ties to the pharmaceutical industry, to lead the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the White House said on Friday. If confirmed by the Senate, Gottlieb would be in charge of implementing Trump’s plan to dramatically cut regulations governing food, drugs, cosmetics, dietary supplements and tobacco. Gottlieb is well known on Capitol Hill, where he has testified multiple times on hot-button health issues, including complex drug pricing matters, and is viewed favorably by drug companies and pharmaceutical investors. He sits on the boards of several small drug and biotech companies and is an adviser to GlaxoSmithKline Plc (GSK.L). “Thank God it’s Gottlieb,†Brian Skorney, an investment analyst at Robert W. Baird, wrote in a research note. “We view this as a favorable development for the sector.†Gottlieb was chosen over Jim O’Neill, a libertarian investor close to Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel, a PayPal co-founder who now advises Trump on technology and science matters. O’Neill’s stated view that drugs should be approved before being proven effective generated widespread alarm. Gottlieb, 44, is a resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute think tank and a partner at a large venture capital fund. He is a former FDA deputy commissioner who has advocated a loosening of requirements needed for approval of new medical products. “Scott knows how the agency works and he will move it forwards, though maybe not always in ways the agency is comfortable with,†said John Taylor, a lawyer and president of compliance and regulatory affairs with the consulting firm Greenleaf Health and a former acting FDA deputy commissioner. In addition to his public health and health policy roles, Gottlieb has for the past decade been a partner at New Enterprise Associates, a large venture fund with investments in the life sciences, medical technology and healthcare services. Critics of the nomination say Gottlieb’s financial background present an array of potential conflicts of interest. Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, said Gottlieb “has spent most of his career dedicated to promoting the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry.†If confirmed, he added, “he will have to be recused from key decisions time and time again.†Stephen Ubl, a spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said it “looks forward to working with Dr. Gottlieb in his new role and engaging with him and the Agency as they seek to modernize the drug discovery and review process.†Gottlieb, who declined to comment on the nomination, is unlikely to up-end the FDA in the way O’Neill might have, but he is nonetheless expected to bring significant change, including moving the agency to increase flexibility in the clinical trial development process. In this he will be supported by the recently passed 21st Century Cures Act which instructs the FDA among other things to consider the use of “real world evidence†to support new drug applications. This could include anecdotal data, observational studies and patient reports “People don’t want to take chances with safety, but there’s increasingly some clamor to be more flexible on the efficacy side,†said Kathleen Sanzo, who leads the FDA practice at the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius. “You need to have some signal of efficacy. The question is, how much?†The FDA has attempted to push back against moves to sideline randomized clinical trials, long considered the gold standard. In January it issued a report documenting 22 cases in which drugs that appeared to show promise in early trials turned out to be either ineffective or unsafe or both in larger trials. One of Gottlieb’s priorities will likely be to streamline the process for approving generic versions of complex, difficult-to-copy therapeutics. He has stated publicly that he does not believe the FDA has good tools or policies to move such products and has advocated the creation of different approval standards. “He’s a thoughtful and nuanced kind of guy, and not solely an industry shill,†said Jim Shehan, head of Lowenstein Sandler’s FDA regulatory practice. A survey conducted by Mizuho Securities USA Inc of 53 pharmaceutical executives found that 72 percent favored Gottlieb over other potential candidates. Many described him as knowledgeable, experienced and balanced. “Gottlieb is someone who the industry and investors view as an incremental positive,†said RBC Capital Markets analyst Michael Yee. “The industry and investors need rational scientific logic and an understanding of risks and benefits.†Patient advocates welcomed the news. Gottlieb “has firsthand experience at the FDA and as a physician that has treated patients understands the breadth of work that needs to be achieved on their behalf,†said Ellen Sigal, founder of Friends of Cancer Research. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3274 | 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: Twenty million Americans are out of work.
contextual information: For all the discussion of immigration, foreign policy and social issues in the 2016 campaign, one issue always returns to the fore eventually: jobs. Republican candidate John Kasich emphasizes his record on jobs as Ohio governor in a new ad. Theadbegins with grainy footage of what seems to be an unemployment line. The narrators first words are, Twenty million Americans are out of work, and this assertion is bolstered by being repeated in on-screen text: This figure sounded high to us, since the official number of unemployed Americans during the most recent month, February, tops out at about 7.8 million. So we asked the Kasich campaign for their evidence, and they proceeded to cite a source that caught us off-guard: Us. Specifically, they pointed to ourfact-check from Augustin which we analyzed a statement by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Trump said that we have 93 million people out of work. They look for jobs, they give up, and all of a sudden, statistically, they're considered employed. We rated this claimFalse, largely because the 93 million number included lots of people who would not be expected to want or be able to work, including full-time students, senior citizens, the disabled, and those who have chosen to take care of their children full-time. However, in the process, we conducted a mathematical experiment in which we played with possible numbers of Americans who are out of work that fit somewhere between the official unemployment rate (on the low end) and Trumps number (on the high end). HELP US RAISE $15,000 TO HIRE AN EXTRA FACT-CHECKER Heres what we wrote, using the statistics that were current at the time: The official number of unemployed Americans is 8.3 million -- less than one-tenth of what Trump says. But to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, its possible to expand this number using more credible economic thinking. Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, says its not unreasonable to include: The 6.4 million people who havent looked for work recently enough to qualify as being in the labor force, but who say they currently want a job. And the 6.5 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job. This would mean that upwards of 21 million Americans could be described with some justification as out of work involuntarily, either fully or partially. But thats not even one-quarter of the number that Trump offered. Rob Nichols, a spokesman for Kasich, said the campaign simply updated our math with more recent data in preparing the television ad. The numbers for January 2016, Nichols said, were: Unemployed: 7.8 million People who havent looked for work recently enough to qualify as being in the labor force, but who say they currently want a job: 6.2 million People working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job: 6 million. That works out to 20 million on the nose. We salute the Kasich campaigns efforts to fact-check-proof their assertion. Still, we should note that we didnt intend our calculation to be the final word on how to determine the number of out of work Americans. Rather, we were trying to provide a benchmark for showing just how wrong Trumps number was. Well note that our wording was that the 21 million figure had some justification not exactly a clarion call for the Bureau of Labor Statistics to change its longstanding protocol. In subsequent fact-checks, though not the one the Kasich campaign referred to, we have added language that is clearer about our intentions. We did that, for instance, in ourFeb. 11, 2016, fact-checkof a different statement by Trump: Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. The number's probably 28, 29, as high as 35 (percent). In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent. In that fact-check, which produced a rating ofPants on Fire, we prefaced a similar alternative calculation this way: We are deliberately stretching the numbers here as an intellectual exercise; we are not saying that 15.6 percent is a more accurate unemployment rate than the official one of 4.9 percent. But enough from us. What do the two economists we checked with for the original fact-check think about Kasichs use of the 20 million figure? Given that the image looks like a guy in an unemployment line, I'd say it's a misleading figure, said Tara Sinclair, an economist with George Washington University and the jobs website Indeed.com. Many people have good reasons for not wanting to work now, she said, and that is something distinct from actually being out of work. Burtless agreed, saying, The 5.988 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job are not out of work. They are employed, but on a work schedule that does not provide them with the weekly hours they desire. At the same time, Burtless said there is still some value in the number cited in Kasichs advertisement. Gov. Kasich has given an upper-bound estimate of the total number of Americans who are unemployed or underemployed, Burtless said. Its just not theonlyestimate. Our ruling Kasichs ad said that 20 million Americans are out of work. The Kasich campaign shrewdly cites a past PolitiFact item as evidence for this larger-than-usual estimate of Americas out of work population. But its worth noting that the calculation we did was not intended to determine the actual number of out-of-work Americans, but rather to suggest the highest figure with any sort of credibility as a way of seeing how far out of line Trumps assertion was. The statement is partially accurate but takes things out of context, so we rate it Half True. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD3275 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The German military, buoyed by 45 million views of its previous social media reality show The Recruits , is to launch a new show on Monday that shows the lives of eight soldiers serving in U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mali. The six-week show provides a realistic and authentic look at an actual military deployment, including the crash of an Airbus Tiger helicopter in July that killed both crew members, a defense ministry spokesman said on Friday. It will be shown Mondays through Thursdays on YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, with a chatbot sending messages several times a day about the soldiers activities. Colonel Holger Neumann said the accident would play a role in one of the later episodes and would be treated with the necessary sensitivity . The military last month resumed flights of the Tiger helicopters, but continues to investigate the cause of the crash. The show cost 6.5 million euros to produce and market, Neumann said, describing it as part of the military s drive to make the military a more attractive career option. The last show, which showed how new recruits were trained, sparked a 40-percent increase in traffic at the ministry s career website and a 25-percent boost in calls to a recruitment hotline, he said. Ilka Hoffmann, a board member at the GEW union that represents about 280,000 teachers, social workers and education workers, said the new program s action film aesthetic was clearly targeting young people and glamorizing war. Not everything is as positive as it is portrayed. People can die during this deployment or come back traumatized, she said. The Bundeswehr can t want people to sign up out of a sense of adventure. She said the union, the nonprofit group Terres des Hommes and other groups have also protested the military s school outreach program aimed at 16- and 17-year-olds, saying it viewed the recruitment drive as a violation of U.N. Convention on Children. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3276 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: If there s one person in this entire nation who does not deserve a seat at the State of the Union, it s Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis. Her reckless abuse of her position of power to deny same-sex couples the right to marry was outright unconstitutional. So unconstitutional, in fact, that it put her in prison.To top it off, she s not even attending to listen to the president, but rather just be a bigot counterweight in the crowd. According to her lawyer, Mat Staver: She is not so much looking forward to going so much because of what President Obama has to say, she doesn t have much interest in that, as much as just to be there, to be a visible counterweight. The most bizarre part of her invitation is that the Congressman who invited her didn t even know that s who he was inviting. House Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) apparently didn t have a clue. He told HuffPo: I didn t invite anyone, Jordan initially said late Tuesday afternoon, as he was jogging to House votes. When pressed on whether he had given his ticket to the Family Research Council, which then gave it to Davis which is what a Democratic aide told HuffPost had happened Jordan said he would have to confirm with his office. I don t know, he said.When Jordan was seen later, he confirmed the invitation: Yeah, so we gave a ticket to at the request of the Family Research Council we gave the ticket to Kim Davis family I found out today. I m being totally honest with you: That s Family Research Council asked us, her family wanted a ticket, and we said OK.' Jordan seems clearly okay with the decision, because even though she s a criminal who didn t follow the law, conservatives nationwide see her as some sort of religious martyr doing her due diligence in the name of the Lord, Constitution be damned.Should Davis be able to attend one of the most prestigious annual events in the nation? Of course not. But leave it to Republicans and their quest to bring bigotry front and center as part of their party platform.Featured image: YouTube | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3277 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Mick Mulvaney is one smart cookie. He s doing a fantastic job cutting where cuts need to be made. Congress will complain about ANY cut to their voter base s favorite item. Listen to the grandstanding from Jackson-Lee on cuts to medicaid: They are begging for their medicaid The Grandstanding is so sickening!It went downhill from there. Jackson-Lee wanted to try and make Mulvaney out to be an uncaring guy. She s a total bully!HE S ONE SMART COOKE! MULVANEY JUST GAVE DETAILS OF THE BUDGET CUTS IN A FANTASTIC PRESS CONFERENCE. WE HIGHLY RECOMMEND THE ENTIRE VIDEO BELOW: Office of Management and Budgets (OMB) Director Mick Mulvaney outlines the structure, intents and purposes of the Trump administration Fiscal Year 2018 Budget The Taxpayers Budget The best part of this great news conference is when a reporter asks about cuts to climate science programs : At the 17:00 mark Mick Mulvaney rips into the reporter and it s just awesome!We recommend the entire video because you ll see Trump hired one smart cookie! Mick Mulvaney knows the budget and handles the press beautifully! | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3278 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: As Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau continues to prove that he s an all-around amazing person, he s become admired far beyond Canada s borders.Earlier this week, Trudeau was confronted by some very passionate Americans while stopping at a deli in New York City, which Trudeau was visiting to announce that Canada would seek a UN Security Council seat in 2021. Having spotted the Prime Minister and desperate to escape the horrifying U.S. presidential election, these Americans spoke for many of us when they approached Trudeau and asked, Could you run for president here? And why wouldn t they want him to help rescue us from the possibility of Republican front runner Donald Trump?! He s the exact opposite: he s already increased taxes on the wealthy, welcomed Syrian refugees into his country, become an outspoken feminist and is just as interested in climate change as President Barack Obama. The prospect of President Trump is such a threat, that another candidate in addition Democrat candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders would be a tremendous relief.Trudeau gently explained to those two Americans why a presidential run wasn t a possibility for him: It s very simple, I m not American-born. But these Americans weren t ready to take no for an answer. One of them quickly countered, Ted Cruz can do it. Trudeau reminded them that Cruz was born as an American because although Cruz was born in Canada, his mother was an American citizen.Then Trudeau s admirers began to get desperate. One of the men said, All our guys are so bad, you ve gotta believe us. We ve met em all they re so terrible. Please. His companion added, They re boring, weird. We have to settle for them. Please. Trudeau stood firm and said, You know what, I have tremendous confidence in the American people. Then, both men literally dropped down to their knees and pleaded with Trudeau: We ll do anything. We re begging you. We re literally begging you. Trudeau simply responded, I don t know if you noticed, but I actually have a job, and it s a pretty good one. He then patted one of the kneeling men on the back and continued on his way.This just happened to @JustinTrudeau in a NYC cafe: @cnn @ABC @HuffingtonPost @FoxNews pic.twitter.com/BuceWMnGge Stephen Ward (@_stephenward) March 17, 2016Here s another view:Justin Trudeau dans un resto de Manhattan. Ces 2 Am ricains le supplient de se lancer dans la course pr sidentielle! pic.twitter.com/QgrrEdVaIj Marie-Jo lle Parent (@mariejoelle) March 17, 2016CBC News believe it s possible that the two men in the clips are actually pranksters that have shown up at other U.S. presidential campaign events (putting the statement We ve met em all into context). The duo resembles the two men who wore Nazi-like armbands to a Trump event (with a pro-Trump logo instead), a man who interrupted a Marco Rubio rally to accuse the Florida senator of stealing his girlfriend, and a man who sat behind Hillary Clinton with a Settle for Hillary. Whether or not this was a stunt, it very much reflects where America is at right now. Most of us are looking to anyone who could save this country from Donald Trump and judging from the amount of supporters Trump has gathered, we wish we had as much faith in our fellow Americans as Trudeau does. Featured image via video screen capture | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3279 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Pointing Fingers Over Trump’s Victory November 17, 2016
After Donald Trump’s victory, Democrats and progressives have traded accusations as to what was at fault, the Establishment’s insistence on Hillary Clinton or the insurgent challenges from Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein, reports Nat Parry.
By Nat Parry
As the reality of Donald J. Trump’s victory in the Nov. 8 presidential election sets in, Democrats and progressives have been trading accusations over who – or what – may have led to this historic electoral defeat.
For progressives who backed Vermont’s independent Sen. Bernie Sanders in the primaries, the culprit is clearly the Democratic Party establishment, led by the likes of former Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and current interim DNC chair Donna Brazile, who they blame for stacking the deck against their candidate and ensuring Hillary Clinton’s nomination – despite her considerable baggage heading into the election. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. (Photos by Gage Skidmore and derivative by Krassotkin, Wikipedia)
These progressives point to Clinton’s historically low favorability ratings in national polls, and the fact that in a hypothetical one-one-one match-up between Trump and Sanders, polling data showed early on that Sanders would have likely defeated Trump easily. Trump himself seemed to understand the advantage Sanders had over him in a possible general election contest, tweeting in May 2016 that he “would rather run against Crooked Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders and that will happen because the books are cooked against Bernie!”
Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, Sanders was clearly more liked, even as Clinton wrapped up the nomination last summer. Gallup polling found in June 2016 that Sanders held 70 percent favorable and 18 percent unfavorable ratings among Democratic voters, while Clinton was seen favorably by 67 percent and unfavorably by 28 percent. In the aftermath of Trump’s victory – assisted by the lowest voter turnout in 20 years – some have argued that enthusiasm for Sanders could have pushed the Democrats to victory in key swing states that ultimately went to Trump.
To back up these claims, the progressive website USUncut pointed out on Nov. 10 that in five states that Sanders won in the primaries – Indiana, Michigan, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Wisconsin – the exit polling data indicated that the demographic groups that helped Trump reach 270 electoral college votes were also Sanders’s key demographics.
“Assuming that Sanders won white, rural rust belt voters in the traditionally blue states that Hillary Clinton lost,” Sanders would have won the Electoral College with a 303-235 advantage , according to this analysis.
Yet, while progressives blame the Democratic establishment for pushing an unpopular nominee – who was saddled by a federal investigation into her use of a private email server while Secretary of State, questions related to the ethics of her collecting sizable speaking fees from Wall Street firms, and suspicions over the Clinton Foundation’s dealings with foreign governments – establishment Democrats have been largely placing the blame on progressives for failing to unite behind Clinton.
Some commentators have pointed fingers at voters who decided to buck the two-party system and cast a ballot for the Green Party’s Jill Stein or the Libertarian Party’s Gary Johnson while others have assigned blame to Sanders for daring to mount a primary challenge against Clinton in the first place.
This was the argument of Prof. Gil Troy, who wrote at Time Magazine on Nov. 14 that “Senator Bernie Sanders earned the 2016 ‘Ralph Nader Award’ for the Leftist Most Responsible for Helping Republicans Win the Presidency.”
While acknowledging that Trump “cleverly exploited voters’ frustrations” and that “Clinton’s campaign in 2016 was as rigid and empty as it was when she lost in 2008,” Troy nevertheless argues that Sanders’ insurgent primary campaign “pushed her too far left to prevent an effective re-centering in the fall.”
Troy offers few facts or polling data to back up these claims, instead making broad-based assertions such as “just as Ralph Nader siphoned tens of thousands of votes on Election Day 2000 in Florida from Al Gore, causing the deadlock and George W. Bush’s victory, Bernie Sanders’ similar vampire effect enfeebled Hillary Clinton.”
According to this view, even running a progressive primary election challenge – much less a third-party campaign – is dangerously unacceptable, creating a so-called “vampire effect” that “siphons votes” that rightfully belong to someone else.
The Spoiler Effect
While Sanders remains the target of some criticism for costing the Democrats the election, the real vitriol is leveled at third parties and their supporters. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida.
Typical was the reaction of Newsweek senior writer Kurt Eichenwald, who published an account of an encounter he had with a fan in the Philadelphia International Airport following the election. The individual had approached Eichenwald to praise his work but nearly ended up the victim of a physical assault.
According to Eichenwald, the man, who had recognized the pundit from his television appearances, thanked him for his reporting on Trump and expressed disgust that Trump had won. Eichenwald then asked the fan who he had voted for. The man stated that he voted for Green Party nominee Jill Stein, to which Eichenwald replied: “You’re lucky it’s illegal for me to punch you in the face.” According to his account of the interaction, Eichenwald then told his fan to go “have sex with himself.”
As anyone who has ever voted for a party other than the Democrats or Republicans can attest, this is a pretty familiar reaction. In the United States’ winner-take-all electoral system, a vote for anyone outside of the two main parties is seen as a “wasted vote” that could “spoil” the election, and those who make this decision risk professional and social ostracism.
In this system, third-party voters are vilified to an extent not seen for any other voting demographic – including nonvoters who in fact account for a far greater share of the electorate, and therefore have a much bigger effect in swinging the election.
Yet, this has not stopped many pundits and social media users from piling blame onto supporters of Stein or Johnson, who are deemed reckless and irresponsible for so frivolously casting a ballot for candidates who had no chance of winning – or worse yet, as personally culpable for Trump’s victory and all the disastrous policies that might follow.
“If you vote for somebody who can’t win for president, it means that you don’t care who wins for president,” opined MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Election Night. She later elaborated on this wasted-vote theory, tweeting about a fanciful scenario in which every Stein vote and half of Johnson’s votes would have gone to Clinton, who might have then claimed enough states from Trump to eke out an Electoral College win, a story repeated by CNN .
In a similar vein, columnist Paul Krugman weighed in by tweeting in the early morning hours of Nov. 9 that “Jill Stein has managed to play Ralph Nader,” referring to the “spoiler effect” that the 2000 Green Party nominee allegedly had on the election 16 years ago. “Without her Florida might have been saved.”
Flawed Analysis
Setting aside rehashed arguments from 2000, when it comes to Election 2016 independent evaluations of third-party voting have concluded that the effect of this voting bloc was statistically negligible, and cannot seriously be attributed to Clinton’s defeat. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
A Wall Street Journal analysis, for example, found that Clinton would have needed to win 70 percent of the vote share that went to both the Libertarian and Green parties across eight swing states to claim victory – a highly unlikely scenario considering that the Libertarian Party champions a brand of fiscal conservatism and limited government that traditionally appeals to right-leaning, Republican voters. (Indeed, the 2016 Libertarian Party ticket was headed by two former Republican governors: Gary Johnson of New Mexico and Bill Weld of Massachusetts.)
In another analysis, the Washington Post concluded that in the five states Trump won by a margin smaller than the combined Johnson/Stein vote, some of them could have been flipped if the entire Stein vote was added to Clinton’s total. In this scenario, the Post notes, the outcome might have changed in Michigan and Wisconsin, still however leaving her short of an Electoral College victory.
The paper pointed out however that “this projection rests on the unrealistic assumption that all Stein voters would have voted for Clinton,” conceding that it is impossible to “know how Johnson and Stein backers would have voted if forced to choose between Clinton, Trump and staying home.” More realistically, many would have “skipped the presidential race or voted for another candidate .”
Besides the lack of hard statistical data to back up the wasted vote/spoiler effect claims, they also rest on a flawed assumption that anyone’s votes – whether Clinton’s, Trump’s, Johnson’s or Stein’s – actually belong to anyone else. In fact, many third-party voters are simply fed up with the system itself, and hope that by voting for other options, it might be possible to someday build up viable alternatives to the two-party system.
This was especially the case this year, in which the numbers of disaffected voters reached historic proportions. By the time the primaries had been decided last summer, in fact, the two front-runners were the most unpopular candidates seen in a generation, which should have been seen as a warning sign to Democrats who traditionally rely on high voter turnout for electoral success.
According to a Quinnipiac poll released in June, Clinton had a 57 percent unfavorability rating, while Trump received a 59 percent unfavorability rating. Moreover, according to a survey by Data Targeting, 55 percent of Americans favored having an independent or third-party presidential candidate to consider. Among millennials – a key demographic for Barack Obama’s victories in 2008 and 2012 – 91 percent expressed support for additional choices this year.
Another poll, released in September just before the Trump-Clinton debates began, found that 76 percent of Americans favored Johnson and Stein sharing the stage with the two main party candidates in the debates. This, of course, did not happen, with the Commission on Presidential Debates sticking to its strict criteria that independents and third parties need to reach 15 percent in national polling before they are allowed into the debates.
This is perhaps one reason why Americans remained largely ignorant of Stein’s and Johnson’s campaigns, with Gallup finding that 63 percent were unfamiliar with Johnson heading into the general election, and 68 percent were unfamiliar with Stein.
Voter Boycotts and Voter Suppression
Regardless of the impacts of third-party alternatives – which only ended up receiving a total of 4 percent of the popular vote – the deep disaffection among American voters that was seen in earlier polling seemed to manifest itself in other voting trends on Election Day. This disaffection can be seen in the high number of down-ballot voters who opted not to cast a ballot for president this year. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.
One telling analysis found that in 14 states, down-ballot candidates received more votes than presidential candidates.
In North Carolina, for instance, about 30,000 more people cast ballots for incumbent Gov. Pat McCrory and Roy Cooper than for any of the presidential nominees. In Vermont, about 314,000 voters cast ballots in the governor’s race, and 313,000 for the Senate, while just 291,000 voted for president – a difference of almost 8 percent.
In Oregon, where Democrats Sen. Ron Wyden and Gov. Kate Brown easily won re-election, their races drew about 75,000 more votes than the presidential contest. Other states in which down-ballot voters essentially boycotted the presidential election included Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.
Besides nonvoters, another factor that should be receiving at least as much attention as third-party “spoilers” are the would-be voters who could not cast a ballot due to systematic disenfranchisement, possible voter suppression or other all-too-familiar problems at polling places. As the Brennan Center for Justice noted on Nov. 14, “too many voters had to contend with long lines, malfunctioning voting machines, confusion over voting restrictions, voter intimidation, [and] voter registration problems.”
The nonpartisan law and policy institute, which has been documenting flaws in U.S. election administration for years, notes that “2016 was not the first election in which these problems have occurred – and that itself is a problem.”
Describing numerous instances of voting problems across the country, the group concluded that “the ways in which elections are administered, including how well they are resourced, can have a negative impact on citizens’ ability to cast a ballot and the confidence the public has in the system.”
Investigative reporter Greg Palast went further than that, contending that “before a single vote was cast, the election was fixed by GOP and Trump operatives.”
He noted in a Nov. 11 blog post that in 2013, just as the Supreme Court overturned key sections of the Voting Rights Act, Republican operatives created a system called Crosscheck to purge 1.1 million Americans from the voter rolls of Republican-controlled states.
According to his count, in Michigan, the Crosscheck purge list eliminated 449,922 voters from the rolls, while Trump claimed victory in that state by just 13,107 votes. In Arizona, the Trump victory margin was 85,257 votes, while a total of 270,824 voters were eliminated by Crosscheck. The Trump victory margin in North Carolina was 177,008, while the Crosscheck purge list accounted for 589,393 voters knocked off the rolls.
Palast notes that “the electoral putsch was aided by nine other methods of attacking the right to vote of Black, Latino and Asian-American voters … including ‘caging,’ ‘purging,’ blocking legitimate registrations, and wrongly shunting millions to ‘provisional’ ballots that will never be counted.”
He also points to the discrepancies between the exit polling data and the final results in several battleground states, noting that exit polling is historically “deadly accurate.” Despite this, Palast notes that in 2016, the exit polling was off the mark in at least four key swing states.
According to the exit polls, Clinton should have won Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, but at the end of the day all of these states went to Trump. Accounting for a total of 74 Electoral College votes, these four states would have been more than enough for Clinton to have flipped the election.
And of course, this all assumes that the Electoral College is legitimate in the first place. The fact remains that Hillary Clinton received more than one million more votes nationwide than Donald Trump, and the only reason he is assuming the White House is due to the arcane and controversial system of allocating votes through the Electoral College.
This has led to increasing calls to abolish the Electoral College altogether based on the idea that elections should be determined on the principle of one person, one vote.
Needed Reforms Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson.
Needless to say, to many around the world – not to mention many within the United States – these elections are looking less like free expressions of the people’s will than they do down-and-dirty slug fests in which either side is willing to claim a victory at any cost.
This election was observed by two international organizations in fact, and while their final reports vary to considerable degrees, both the Organization of American States and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe both criticized the tone of the election and highlighted numerous structural deficiencies in the way the United States chooses its leaders.
The OAS final report identified the following issues as representing key areas for improvement in the U.S. electoral system: taking measures to avoid long lines at polling places, broadening cooperation between states to compare information and avoid possible duplications in voter registries, expanding the practice of redistricting through nonpartisan commissions, addressing the impacts of the Supreme Court’s decision to eliminate parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, establishing better campaign finance rules, and jettisoning the divisive campaign rhetoric that has turned off so many voters from the process.
The OAS also noted the unusual practice in the United States of simultaneously mandating voter identification while not providing this required identification to eligible voters.
“Practically all countries in the region provide at least one free form of national identification to their citizens, which is used for electoral purposes,” said the OAS . “In the U.S., 32 states currently have laws in force that require voters to show some form of prescribed identification to verify their identity before casting a vote.” However, these states do not make this identification readily available to citizens, contrary to good electoral practice.
This is also a weakness that the OSCE pointed out in its report , noting: “Voter identification rules are politically divisive and vary across the states, with 32 states requiring photo identification. A high volume of litigation regarding voter identification continued up to Election Day, generating confusion among voters and election officials regarding the application of rules. Efforts to ensure the integrity of the vote are important, but should not lead to the disenfranchisement of eligible voters.”
The 57-country organization also noted the undue obstacles faced by minor parties and independents trying to compete in U.S. elections.
“The number of signatures required and the signature submission deadlines vary from state to state, which made it cumbersome for third party or independent candidates to register across all states for presidential elections,” the OSCE pointed out. “Both the Green Party and Libertarian Party challenged ballot access requirements in several states, with success in a few instances.”
The organization, which has been monitoring elections in the United States since 2004, regretted that since previous election observation missions, a number of its “priority recommendations remain unaddressed.” It pointed out that “deficiencies in the legal framework persist, such as the disenfranchisement of citizens living in various territories, restrictions on the voting rights of convicted criminals and infringements on secrecy of the ballot.”
Rather than focusing on who is to blame for Trump’s victory in Election 2016, Democrats, Republicans, progressives, independent conservatives, third-party supporters, minorities, and good-government groups might be better served coming together and finally taking seriously the task of electoral reform, beginning with addressing some of the key recommendations of impartial international observers.
Perhaps then, this perennial debate and the endless exchange of recriminations might finally come to an end.
Nat Parry is the co-author of Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush. [This story originally appeared at Essential Opinion, https://essentialopinion.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/election-2016s-blame-game/ | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3280 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: No, Domino's does not have any free online coupons available for two large pizzas. Claim summaries: Yet another "free coupon" scam attempted to lure social media users with bogus promises.
contextual information: In April 2020, Facebook posts circulating online offered coupons supposedly good for two free large pizzas from the Domino's pizza chain: Users who clicked on the offer were taken to an external website where they were instructed to answer survey questions in order to receive their coupons: After completing the questionnaire, however, users were then required to click a button to share the "offer" with their Facebook friends before they could retrieve their coupons. Those who complied by spamming their friends were then allowed to click a "Receive the Coupon" button, but there was no actual coupon to receive. Like innumerable other "free merchandise" offers on Facebook, this offer was another variation of a common scam. other free merchandise offers Facebook We've had many occasions to alert readers to this kind of fraud: These types of viral coupon scams often involve websites and social media pages set up to mimic those of legitimate companies. Users who respond to those fake offers are required to share a website link or social media post in order to spread the scam more widely and lure in additional victims. Then those users are presented with a survey that extracts personal information such as email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and even sometimes credit card numbers. Finally, those who want to claim their free gift cards or coupons eventually learn they must first sign up to purchase a number of costly goods, services, or subscriptions. The Better Business Bureau offers consumers several general tips to avoid getting scammed: offers consumers | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3281 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: In a Washington Post profile of Trump White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, Michael Kranish and Craig Whitlock write that Bannon’s experiences as a naval officer during the Carter administration helped shape his conservative political beliefs. For Bannon, raised in an Irish Catholic Democratic household in Richmond, VA, President Carter’s botched rescue mission during the Iran hostage crisis was a political turning point. [From the Washington Post: As Bannon has told it, the failed hostage rescue is one of the defining moments of his life, providing a searing example of failed military and presidential leadership — one that he carries with him as he serves as President Trump’s chief strategist. He has said he wasn’t interested in politics until he concluded that Jimmy Carter had undercut the Navy and blown the rescue mission. … Still, the experience shaped his thinking. He saw the military buildup under President Ronald Reagan, and the in Tehran continues to inform his view about that region of the world, as well as the role of U. S. military power and its commander in chief. … Some of Bannon’s shipmates recalled that the crew was given a ribbon for its modest role [in the rescue mission]. But Bannon and many other crew members were livid at Carter for the botched rescue. “It shattered his confidence in President Carter,†Masso said. “It made him all the more in the tank for Reagan. †In October 1980, with the Foster in port at Long Beach, Bannon went to Masso’s home to watch a debate. “He watched that debate like a prizefight,†Masso said. Three months later, after Reagan won the election, Bannon was working for the new president, serving as an assistant in the office of the chief of naval operations at the Pentagon. He watched with satisfaction as Reagan increased the military budget and strengthened the Navy, with most of the focus on combating the Soviet Union. He served for three years and simultaneously studied national security and earned a master’s degree at Georgetown University. Read the rest here. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3282 | 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: Obama Eliminates Combat Pay Claim summaries: Does a new policy eliminate combat pay for U.S. military personnel 'unless they are being shot at'?
contextual information: Claim: A new White House policy eliminates combat pay for U.S. military personnel "unless they are being shot at." Example: [Collected via e-mail, February 2012] Obama pulls combat pay from service personnel. President Obama's latest policy outrage makes no attempt to hide his contempt for our military, as he is ordering that our troops serving overseas in war zones overseas are not to receive combat pay unless they are being shot at. A Marine who lives in Florida has just posted a note on Facebook which stated that he received a letter from his MyPay account that he would only be receiving his Hazard pay (Imminent Danger Pay) if he is actually in a hostile area and at risk of being shot at. So I just got a letter from MyPay (the way we get paid in the military), saying that I will only reason Combat Pay while deployed for the days that I take fire or am in a hostile area. Now, as an Infantry Marine, I'm constantly in a combat zone it may not always be popping off, but for them to take that away from us is bullshit. Now, the aviation tech who sits on Camp Leatherneck, sure, I can see him not getting Combat Pay, but to take it away from the grunts, the ground pounders, the front line of defense ... come on, Uncle Sam. You let the Liberals win a big one here Florida Marine Corp Soldier Origins: This item about the elimination of imminent danger pay (also known as "combat pay" or "hostile fire pay") for all U.S. military personnel save for those who are "being shot at" includes some truth and a good deal of mischaracterization. It references a policy change that took place back in February 2012 not as an "order from President Obama," but rather with the implementation of the sprawling 2012 National Defense Authorization Act passed by Congress: National Defense Authorization Act The first major overhaul in hostile fire pay since World War II has been ordered by a Senate committee in a plan that would pay troops based on their actual number of days in a hostile area rather than a flat monthly rate. Approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee as part of the 2012 defense authorization bill, S 1254, the provision would convert the current $225 for hostile fire and imminent danger pay, paid for any month in which a person spends any time in a designated zone, to a new prorated payment of $7.50 for each day spent in a designated danger zone. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., a Vietnam combat veteran and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee's personnel panel, called the change a "basic accounting measure to ensure that individuals receive hostile fire or imminent danger pay only for the time they spend in qualifying areas." Webb said ground combat troops will see "minimal impact" from the change "as they are stationed full time in the qualifying areas." In effect, all members of the U.S. military continue to receive imminent danger pay (IDP) for serving in areas "where members are subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger because of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism or wartime conditions," whether or not they are actually "shot at." The change that came about in February 2012 was that previously service members received a flat monthly payment ($225) for each month in which they spent any time at all in an imminent danger pay area; instead, they are now paid a per diem rate of $7.50 for each day they actually spend in such areas. Service members who come under fire still receive the full monthly hostile fire pay amount regardless of where they are serving. As described by the Air Force Times, the reasoning behind the change in policy was as follows: Beginning with Feb. 15 [2012] paychecks, troops will be paid only for the actual days they spend in a qualifying danger pay location, Pentagon officials said. Under the previous policy, troops who spent any portion of a month in a danger pay location received full monthly danger pay of $225. The proration amounts to $7.50 per day. So, for example, if an airman spends only 10 days of the month in an eligible area, he will have only $75 in IDP added to his paycheck. The change would fall mostly on rear-echelon and headquarters staff whose occasional and short visits to a hostile area, such as attending a change-of-command ceremony in Afghanistan, had provided them the same $225 monthly hostile fire pay that went to the front-line airmen or soldiers facing imminent danger every day of the month. Because changes of command often happen on the first day of a month, someone arriving May 31 to attend a June 1 ceremony previously drew $450 two months of danger pay. Those one- or two-day visitors benefited from what ground combat troops had derisively called "sightseer pay." The change was designed mainly to prevent people who briefly visit a combat or danger zone from receiving the same pay as someone assigned to a deployed unit. Under the previous rules, a person could schedule a visit to an eligible area on the last day of one month, depart the next day and collect two full months of danger pay. Exceptions will be made for troops who are "exposed to a hostile fire incident." Regardless of location, those troops will receive a monthly payment of $225. A 2 February 2012 Armed Forces Press Service release explained the implementation of the new policy: release Service members now will receive imminent danger pay only for days they actually spend in hazardous areas, Pentagon officials said. The change, which took effect [1 February 2012], was included in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which President Barack Obama signed into law Dec. 31. "Members will see the prorated amount in their Feb. 15 pay records," Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby said. The act called for DOD to pay service members imminent danger pay only for the time they spend in areas that qualify for the pay. In the past, service members received $225 per month if they spent any time that month in an area where the pay was authorized. "This is a more targeted way of handling that pay," Kirby said. Now, service members will receive $7.50 a day for days spent in these areas. Personnel who travel to the designated areas for periods less than 30 days should keep track of the number of days they are in the area to verify that they are paid for the correct number of days, officials said. The military services are working to waive or remit debts for members who may have been overpaid for January, officials said. The services can waive this "when there is no indication of fraud, fault, misrepresentation, or when members were unaware they were overpaid," Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said. Proration is based on a 30-day month, which translates into a rate of $7.50 per day. It does not matter if the month is 28 or 31 days long, officials explained; if service members serve in affected areas for the complete month, they will receive the full rate of $225 per month. The Defense Department defines imminent danger pay areas as places where members are subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger because of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism or wartime conditions. Service members who come under fire, regardless of location, will receive the full monthly hostile-fire pay amount of $225. Service members will receive notification of the change via emails, on the MyPay system, on social media sites and via the chain of command. Last updated: 31 December 2013 Tighman, Andrew. "New Danger Pay Rules Begin." Air Force Times. 7 February 2012. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3283 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday signed legislation to fund the federal government for two weeks, giving congressional negotiators more time to work out budget priorities through next September and other thorny policy matters. White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said in a post on Twitter that Trump, as expected, signed the stop-gap funding bill that averts a shutdown of federal agencies at midnight when existing money runs out. For months, Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress have been working behind the scenes to hammer out a deal to fund government for fiscal 2018, which began on Oct. 1. Absent that deal, Washington has been operating on temporary spending bills. Much of the negotiation centers around Republican demands for increased military spending. Democrats say the Pentagon does need more money, but they argue that an array of other domestic programs also face shortfalls. A senior Senate Democratic aide said on Friday that the negotiators are trying to figure out how to divide up $200 billion over two years in additional funding. That much of a spending increase is setting off alarms among conservative Republicans. Representative Mark Meadows, who heads the House Freedom Caucus comprised of about three dozen of some of the most conservative members of Congress, said that $70 billion to $80 billion in added spending would be more reasonable. The caucus is pushing for Pentagon increases without more money for other domestic programs. Besides the spending levels, the Democratic aide said negotiators are hoping to come to a deal on protecting around 700,000 undocumented immigrants, who were brought to the United States as children, from possible deportation. Other elements of the negotiations include new disaster relief funds for Puerto Rico and U.S. states hard-hit by hurricanes and wildfires, as well as funding for a children’s health-insurance program for low-income families and money for community health centers. Many in Congress hope the negotiations on these issues can be wrapped up before Dec. 22, when current funding expires and lawmakers hope to leave Washington for a winter break. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3284 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Over the years, William R. Ponsoldt had earned tens of millions of dollars building a string of successful companies. He had renovated apartment buildings in the New York City area. Bred Arabian horses. Run a yacht club in the Bahamas, a rock quarry in Michigan, an company in Canada, even a hedge fund. Now, as he neared retirement, Mr. Ponsoldt, of Jensen Beach, Fla. had a special request for Mossack Fonseca, a law firm well placed in the world of offshore finance: How could he confidentially shift his money into overseas bank accounts and use them to buy real estate and move funds to his children? “He is the manager of one of the richest hedge funds in the world,†a lawyer at Mossack Fonseca wrote when the firm was introduced to Mr. Ponsoldt in 2004. “Primary objective is to maintain the utmost confidentiality and ideally to open bank accounts without disclosing his name as a private person. †In summary, the firm explained: “He needs asset protection schemes, which we are trying to sell him. †Thus began a relationship that would last at least through 2015 as Mossack Fonseca managed eight shell companies and a foundation on the family’s behalf, moving at least $134 million through seven banks in six countries — little of which could be traced directly to Mr. Ponsoldt or his children. These transactions and others like them for a stable of wealthy clients from the United States are outlined in extraordinary detail in the trove of internal Mossack Fonseca documents known as the Panama Papers. The materials were obtained by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, and have now been shared with The New York Times. In recent weeks, the papers’ revelations about Mossack Fonseca’s international clientele have shaken the financial world. The Times’s examination of the files found that Mossack Fonseca also had at least 2, 400 United clients over the past decade, and set up at least 2, 800 companies on their behalf in the British Virgin Islands, Panama, the Seychelles and other jurisdictions that specialize in helping hide wealth. Many of these transactions were legal there are legitimate reasons to create offshore accounts, particularly when setting up a business overseas or buying real estate in a foreign country. But the documents — confidential emails, copies of passports, ledgers of bank transactions and even the various code names used to refer to clients — show that the firm did much more than simply create offshore shell companies and accounts. For many of its American clients, Mossack Fonseca offered a guide of sorts on skirting or evading United States tax and financial disclosure laws. These included locating an individual from a “ †jurisdiction to be the straw man owner of an offshore account, concealing the true American owner, or encouraging one client it knew was a United States resident to use his foreign passports to open accounts offshore, again to avoid scrutiny from regulators, the documents show. If the compliance department at one foreign bank contacted by Mossack Fonseca on behalf of its clients started to ask too many questions about who owned the account, the firm simply turned to other, less inquisitive banks. And even though the law firm said publicly that it would not work with clients convicted of crimes or whose financial activities raised “red flags,†several individuals in the United States with criminal records were able to turn to Mossack Fonseca to open new companies offshore, the documents show. Federal law allows United States citizens to transfer money overseas, but these foreign holdings must be declared to the Treasury Department, and any taxes on capital gains, interest or dividends must be paid — just as if the money had been invested domestically. Federal officials estimate that the government loses between $40 billion and $70 billion a year in unpaid taxes on offshore holdings. Experts in federal tax law, money laundering and offshore accounts — asked by The Times to examine certain documents or at least to identify legal issues raised by the money management techniques that Mossack Fonseca advocated — said the law firm at times had come up with creative, but apparently legal, strategies to save clients money. A common tactic: selling real estate as a shift of corporate assets, instead of as a piece of property subject to transfer taxes. While the experts were reluctant to declare that the law firm or its clients had broken any laws given that no charges have been filed, they said they were surprised at how explicitly Mossack Fonseca had offered advice that appeared carefully crafted to help its clients evade United States tax laws. “The more correspondence that you have between a U. S. person and a bank or law firm discussing tax issues and efforts at concealment, the stronger the government will see it as a potential case worth prosecuting,†said Kevin M. Downing, the lead Justice Department prosecutor in the UBS offshore banking and tax evasion cases, now at the Washington law firm Miller Chevalier. Mossack Fonseca has said repeatedly in recent weeks that its lawyers and staff members have honored international tax and banking laws, and that it is the victim in this case of an illegal hacking attack. But presented with summaries of several cases by The Times, Mossack Fonseca did not try to explain its actions. It simply said that its standards had improved in recent years, as rules internationally had tightened. “Our significantly expanded compliance office today not only evaluates new client candidates, but also existing accounts, and especially those that were established prior to the new international regulatory regime coming into effect,†a spokeswoman said in a written statement, referring to a 2010 law passed by Congress. “It wasn’t always this way. †The firm’s American client list does not appear to include the sort of political figures who have emerged from reporting on the Panama Papers in many other countries around the world. But the services offered by Mossack Fonseca, with 500 employees in more than 30 offices worldwide, were in high demand by the rich and famous in the United States. In 2001, Sanford I. Weill, then the chief of Citigroup, set up an offshore account called April Fool for his yacht. Alfonso Soriano, a former Major League Baseball player with the Yankees and other teams, had a Panamanian corporation created for him. John E. Akridge III, a leading real estate developer in Washington, flew to Panama to meet with Mossack Fonseca lawyers, who in 2011 created the Cyclops Family Foundation in Panama, along with a related bank account. A spokesman for Mr. Weill said the accounts were used for legitimate purposes, and “appropriate disclosures were filed. †Mr. Akridge and Mr. Soriano did not respond to repeated requests for comment. For its best customers, like the Ponsoldts, who declined repeated requests to discuss their work with Mossack Fonseca, the firm’s ministrations went far beyond legal services and banking. It acted as a concierge for “all details regarding your properties and worldwide business affairs,†for example, helping the family confidentially purchase (and dispose of) luxury condominiums at resort destinations and even arranging repairs for a car stored at a vacation home and hiring a contractor to fix broken poolside tiles, the documents show. “You deserve the best Mr. Ponsoldt, and we will try to help you the most we can,†the firm explained in an email. The firm’s American clients often expressed disbelief at how much they could lighten their tax burden by using the techniques advocated by Mossack Fonseca. “At hearing that he can make nearly $8 million per year just on tax savings,†a client from Pennsylvania “was now wide awaken,†a Mossack Fonseca staff member wrote. “I could even detect sweats coming down from his forehead and his cheeks were beginning to blush with crimson excitement. Noticing his interest, I went in for the kill. †In 2006, using a secret email account set up by Mossack Fonseca so his correspondence would not be traced by the authorities, a businessman from Washington State asked a common question among the firm’s potential American clients: “How does a US citizen legally get funds to Panama without the knowledge of the US government and how can those funds be profitably invested without the US government knowing about them?†The reply came from Ramsés Owens, then a partner who helped run the firm’s trust division, offering clients “effective solutions to enhance your privacy, protect your wealth. †Mr. Owens laid out a basic menu of services: a package deal setting up an offshore company in what he promised would be a relatively cheap and quick transaction. “We have right now a special offer by which we create a Private combination for a flat fee of US$4, 500. 00,†Mr. Owens said. “It includes Charter Documents, Regulations, nominee officers and directors, bank account and management of funds, provision of authorized signatories, neutral phone and fax numbers and mail forwarding services for both the private foundation and its underlying company. †With this legal structure in place, Mr. Owens went on to explain, any money placed in these accounts would essentially go into a black hole. “If we create a Private Foundation and the underlying company for you, the funds become completely private (US cannot know) as soon as the funds are deposited under a bank account or investment account in the name of the underlying company or the private foundation,†he wrote. The benefits of such an arrangement were numerous, he added, detailing how the client could effectively evade United States tax laws while protecting himself — and the firm. “You can take the money in cash, you can do a bad investment you can purchase something and not receive anything (an expensive piano, an expensive software),†Mr. Owens wrote. “You can receive an invoice from Panama or any other location and that would justify some of the outgoing moneys. You can also declare everything to the tax administration. “Any decision you make, please be aware that you will have to sign a ‘disclaimer’ to us. We can only ‘suggest,’ but the final decision to take the money out of the country is fully yours, and under the professional opinion of someone in USA. †This was the sort of menu sold to the Ponsoldt family — in a very big way. William Ponsoldt, now 74, had come to Mossack Fonseca with hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, the firm’s staff estimated in “due diligence†memos that also laid out how he had become so wealthy. “He has started off in the 70ties purchasing apartment buildings in New York, in order to refurbish and sell them off,†noted one memo from 2007, shortly after the firm had started to handle the family’s investment accounts. “Having done this for a while he spread out to various businesses and his CV is the typical profile of a serial entrepreneur. †The memo went on to list nine businesses he had created, taken over or helped run, including Glas Aire Industries Group, an automotive parts supplier Zeus Energy Resources, a Texas company Regency Affiliates, which owned a Michigan rock mine and Pegasus Ranch, one of the country’s largest operations. Few American clients, the records show, demanded and received as much attention as Mr. Ponsoldt and two of his children, Tracey and Christopher, each of whom was assigned a secret email account and a code name — “father,†“daughter†and “son. †Mossack Fonseca’s “V. I. P. service†consisted of everything from securing lunch reservations at a popular French bistro in Panama City to pressing the government to make an exception and grant Mr. Ponsoldt and his wife Panamanian passports. Over the years, tens of millions of dollars flowed into a series of shell companies — Escutcheon Investment, with its money at the Banca Privada in the Pyrenees principality of Andorra Probity Investments, with deposits at Andbanc Grup Agricol, also in Andorra Royal Pacific Investments, with deposits at Balboa Securities in Panama and Valdano Investments Group, with deposits at Berenberg Bank in Switzerland, among others, the bank records and other documents show. Mossack Fonseca employees were named as the companies’ officers, avoiding whenever possible any link to the Ponsoldt family. The firm even asked a Hong Kong branch of Barclays, the international bank, to override its rules for proof of the beneficial owners of the accounts. “This is a very special client of ours,†a Mossack Fonseca lawyer wrote, conceding that the firm had intentionally created such a maze of companies so it “leaves us in the position to legally argue that our client is NOT the owner of the structure. †It was not clear if the bank complied. The most important part of this elaborate structure was an entity called the Edenstone Foundation. Panama has long specialized in creating unusual foundations like Edenstone that are neither subject to Panamanian taxes nor required to support charitable causes. They do, however, allow the investors who “contribute†their financing to shield themselves from legal claims in the United States. In secret meetings documented in the Panama Papers, Mossack Fonseca named the Ponsoldt family as the beneficiary, through the foundation, of the money placed in bank accounts around the world. Among the early requests: confidentially transfer $800, 000 from “father†to “son,†meaning moving the money to yet another offshore account — called LBFH of Panama — which Mossack Fonseca had set up on Christopher Ponsoldt’s behalf with bank accounts in Andorra and Panama. One motivation for Christopher Ponsoldt to stash money overseas in accounts not traceable to him: He owned a dirt racetrack in Florida, and he was concerned racers “may get hurt and might then try to sue him for damages,†the law firm notes on his case file said. “Please notify me when the money is deposited in American dollars,†Christopher Ponsoldt wrote to the law firm a few months after his father’s accounts had been set up and $800, 000 was in the process of being transferred to another offshore account Christopher Ponsoldt controlled via the firm. “I want to have U. S. dollars, Australian Dollars, Indian Real’s and some kind of China index, to be determined. †Mossack Fonseca agreed to “prepare a service agreement†between two of the legal entities it managed for the family, to make it look as if there were an actual expenditure of money for a business purpose. “After receiving the money, we will explain to them the nature of this transaction without giving details of your name,†the firm explained to William Ponsoldt, regarding the Caribbean bank through which the money was moving to his son. “Please let us know if you agree with this and if you will instruct the relevant parties to execute the wire transfer. †Federal law generally limits such transfers between family members to $14, 000 a year. But for this transfer, described as a “ distribution,†the documents give no indication that any United States gift taxes were paid, as would most likely have been required, said Jack Blum, a lawyer and expert in international tax evasion who served for more than a decade as a consultant to the Internal Revenue Service. “This is one way in which people with a lot of money step away from being average,†Mr. Blum said after reviewing the documents. Christopher Ponsoldt declined to comment. “I am sorry, I can’t help you,†he said before hanging up. Tracey Ponsoldt Powers, William Ponsoldt’s daughter, approached the firm in October 2008 with an urgent request for help in secretly moving some of her family’s money to Panama and then into gold coins. She feared political developments at home. “I feel VERY unsettled with this election and how the media is censoring information and spinning the American Public to vote Obama,†she wrote to Mr. Owens at Mossack Fonseca. “It is so obvious to me, that they are setting us up with a Socialist — but most people can’t see it happening before their eyes! It’s like propaganda that is brainwashing Americans to forget the Principles of Hard Work, Ingenuity, Risk and Boundless Success!†Mr. Owens suggested shifting the money into a “charity†account, controlled by the firm on the family’s behalf, in increments of less than $100, 000, so it would not be detected. Separately, that same month, William Ponsoldt moved $100, 000 from a company Mossack Fonseca controlled on his behalf into the name of his daughter. This was confirmed in an email from Mossack Fonseca to the code name “daughter. †“The USD 100. 000 is deposited as call Money with high liquidity at Berenberg Bank Schweiz, Zürich,†said the email, which added: “Your Father initiated this process as you know. We will treat you with the same esteem and conditions and service as the family is used to. †The subsequent series of complicated transfers — money from the account would eventually be used by Mossack Fonseca in 2013 at Ms. Powers’s request to buy real estate — would be a challenge for American enforcement authorities, Mr. Blum said. “Simply by constructing all this in such a complex way, they make it extremely hard for enforcement officials to ever have resources to reconstruct what taxes should have been paid,†he said. “What this is all about is obscuring the trail. †Ms. Powers did not respond to a series of calls and emails, and then declined to answer questions when reached on a cellphone. “I have no idea what you are talking about,†she said before hanging up. Across the United States, Mossack Fonseca picked up clients who had similarly urgent and delicate demands. For more than 30 years as the founder of Boston Capital Ventures, Harald Joachim von der Goltz has built a reputation as a savvy investor in emerging companies. What few know, however, is that over roughly that same span of time and with the help of Mossack Fonseca, Mr. von der Goltz has also come to command a vast offshore empire: interconnected corporations, foundations and bank accounts with about $70 million in assets, according to internal emails. A lawyer for Mr. von der Goltz said the beneficial owner of all of the trusts and accounts is Mr. von der Goltz’s mother, who resides in Guatemala. One document also suggests that the tens of millions of dollars in the accounts originally came from businesses operated by Mr. von der Goltz’s father. But numerous other documents prepared by Mossack Fonseca and signed by Mr. von der Goltz list him as the founder, manager and “first beneficiary†of the foundation that controls most of the family’s wealth. Mr. von der Goltz also put assets from companies he helped operate into the accounts, documents show. Most important, Mossack Fonseca registered Mr. von der Goltz as a resident of Guatemala, which tax experts said could help him protect the family money from certain United States tax obligations. “MF Trust has registered Harald Joachim von der Goltz as a client of Guatemala. However, we know he lives in Miami and makes his residence for 5 months of the year in Boston,†Mr. Owens, the Mossack Fonseca partner, wrote in an email in 2009 to top executives at the firm. The firm recognized that claiming the Guatemala residency represented a risk, but considered it a risk worth taking, given Mr. von der Goltz’s importance to the firm. “My suggestion: Leave everything as it is with von der Goltz, i. e. stay and live this potential risk, we might prefer to send money orders and cashier’s checks, which have a slightly lower risk than bank transfers. It’s all well done, customer understands well and accepts it as is,†Mr. Owens wrote. “I agree with your suggestion on my part,†responded Ramón Fonseca, one of the firm’s founders. Money was frequently transferred from several of the offshore accounts to accounts in the United States to fund investments at Mr. von der Goltz’s firm, the documents show. A foundation paid for his daughter’s education, as well as his granddaughter’s high school tuition. In a 2008 email, Mr. von der Goltz’s accountant asked executives at Mossack Fonseca to wire money from Mr. von der Goltz’s mother, Erika. “Erika would like to make a gift to Tica of $100, 000 for his birthday. She hadn’t given him anything,†the email said, providing an account for Mr. von der Goltz at EspÃrito Santo Bank in Miami. “Ohh, yes, I know ERIKA wants it to be done quickly, we will proceed,†Mr. Owens responded before confirming that the money should be moved as requested. Legal experts consulted by The Times said it was difficult to determine definitively if the arrangements related to Mr. von der Goltz violated United States laws. But they said such moves were commonly used by investors seeking to hide their assets and evade federal taxes. “There is reason to question if she was really directing that shift of money,†Mr. Blum said, referring to Mr. von der Goltz’s mother. In a statement, Mr. von der Goltz said the companies were established for legal purposes, and that both he and the companies were compliant with United States tax and reporting requirements. “There has never been any illegal activity associated with these companies,†the statement said. Other case files examined by The Times show how Mossack Fonseca may have turned a blind eye in the vetting process while helping Kjell Gunnar Finstad, a Texas resident, set up an oil company offshore in 2013. Mossack Fonseca has long maintained that it will not work for individuals with criminal records or whose conduct raises “red flags†during its process. But the firm somehow either missed or overlooked Mr. Finstad’s past when it conducted a background search of potential directors for the new offshore oil company, OK Terra Energy, which was run out of Houston but registered in the British Virgin Islands. Three years earlier, Mr. Finstad, the company’s controlling partner and lead investor, had been convicted in Norway for various breaches of securities and accounting laws involving a company called Norex Group. The case was major news in Norway. The records examined by The Times show that Mossack Fonseca collected a copy of Mr. Finstad’s passport, and conducted a basic internet search and a cursory background check. But there is no mention of the fraud case, and no discussion of whether to proceed with setting up the new company, in light of Mr. Finstad’s involvement. Reached at his office in Texas and asked about the Panama Papers, Mr. Finstad said only, “I don’t want to talk about that. †For another client, Mossack Fonseca offered a special service for a premium price. Marianna Olszewski, the New York author of “Live It, Love It, Earn It: A Woman’s Guide to Financial Freedom,†wanted to shift $1 million held by HSBC in Guernsey to a new overseas account. The catch? She did not want her name to appear anywhere near the transaction. Mr. Owens, the Mossack Fonseca lawyer, again offered a solution. Mossack Fonseca would locate what he called a “natural person nominee†in a “ †jurisdiction to stand in for Ms. Olszewski as the owner of the account. “The Natural Person Trustee is a service which is very sensitive,†Mr. Owens wrote. “We need to hire the Natural Person Nominee, pay him, make him sign lots of documents to cover us, make him sign resignations, make him get some proofs evidencing that he has the economic capacity to place such amount of moneys, letters of reference, proof of domicile, etc. etc. †The process, he suggested, would cost her at least $17, 500. Ms. Olszewski approved the maneuver — only to see the firm, at one point, accidentally disclose her name to the banks involved. “Ramses, Please call me ASAP!! This is important! !!!†she wrote to Mr. Owens. “HSBC said someone said marianna olszewski is the principal beneficary! Who has done this!! I need you to call me immediately and tell them hsbc that was a mistake! !!!! !!!!! This is not good and I asked you NOT to do this! this is why we have this structure. †Mr. Owens sought to calm her down, saying that Mossack Fonseca could tell the bank that the natural person nominee actually controlled the account. “This can be solved,†he wrote. Mr. Owens did not tell his client the identity of the natural person nominee, saying simply, “We would appoint a UK citizen residing in Panama since 50 years ago, engineer, entrepreneur,†as they needed someone who would be expected to have such a large amount of money available to transfer. Twelve days later, Mr. Owens sent HSBC a copy of a passport for a man named Edmund James Ward. “Kindly please find hereto attached the due diligence documents of the beneficial owner,†said the email sent to HSBC, noting that “the documents duly correct. †The $1 million from Ms. Olszewski was then transferred to the new accounts, with an assurance that she need not worry. “If for any reason something happens, please also bear in mind that Mossfon is covered by insurance policies for US$10 Million (per event),†Mr. Owens wrote. “We have never used our insurance policy to cover a ‘fraud,’ or something like this. †The use of a to hide the true ownership of an account is one of the remaining illegal ploys favored by Americans today as international banks, under pressure from the United States, demand proof of account ownership, said Jeffrey Neiman, a former federal prosecutor from Miami who specialized in criminal tax offenses, adding that he could not comment directly on this case. “The fact that a law firm was willing to do this legitimizes the process for their clients,†he said. Many of the client files — like those for Mr. Weill, the banker Mr. Soriano, the ballplayer and Mr. Akridge, the developer — contain little information on the purpose of the offshore accounts, or how they were used after they were set up, making it impossible, based on the records available, to assess whether they were used legitimately. But the experts who reviewed some of the documents related to the Ponsoldts, Mr. von der Goltz and Ms. Olszewski said that the firm itself seemed to realize it was taking risks. “They were not always sure themselves which side of the line they were on at any given moment,†said Ross S. Delston, a former federal banking regulator who now specializes in combating efforts. “It is apparent that members of the firm were aware they were treading very close to the line. †In fact, the files contain instances, beginning before the Panama Papers came to light, of Mossack Fonseca lawyers their actions. (In recent weeks, the firm has shut down many of its operations in Nevada, as well as British locations in Jersey and the Isle of Man, and is closing the division that served many of its United States clients.) In 2013, Mossack Fonseca advised Ms. Olszewski to seek outside counsel and consider reporting herself to the I. R. S. warning of possible “severe†repercussions if she did not. The warning came in the wake of a Justice Department investigation of the role that certain Swiss banks had played in helping United States citizens evade federal taxes. Records show that Mossack Fonseca had been paid at least $102, 000 over nine years to help Ms. Olszewski handle various transactions. Ms. Olszewski took the firm’s advice, and belatedly disclosed her accounts to the I. R. S. the documents show. And by 2014, she asked Mossack Fonseca to shut down her accounts and offshore entities, which collectively held at least $1. 7 million. “I’m in complete compliance with all my U. S. tax and reporting requirements,†Ms. Olszewski said in an emailed statement when The Times asked about the accounts. In a second statement, she said she had relied on the advice of legal counsel to establish a trust for her family while living abroad. “I am confident that I have acted properly,†she added, “and any insinuation otherwise is false. †Reached by telephone in late May, Mr. Owens, who is no longer with the law firm, said only, “Regretfully, I cannot speak about individual clients or my time at Mossack Fonseca. †Mossack Fonseca sent a series of similar and increasingly dire warnings to the Ponsoldts in 2013 and 2014, telling them that they had to provide a Swiss bank with documentation that they had paid all required United States taxes — or face possible investigation. “Neither your ex Trustees nor us would like to be involved into any measure the US Department of Justice might try to enforce,†the firm wrote. “In this regard, again we strongly urge you to take the necessary steps to avoid any negative consequences for you as well as us. †The records examined by The Times give no indication whether the Ponsoldts complied, and family members would not say when asked. “I don’t know what you are talking about,†Christopher Ponsoldt said in a second brief conversation before he again hung up. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3285 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Japan said on Friday the decision by the United States to withdraw from the Paris climate accord was “regrettable†and that climate change required a concerted effort by the whole of the international community. “Japan believes the leadership of the developed countries to be of great importance (on climate issues), and the steady implementation of the Paris Agreement is critical in this regard,†the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told a news conference that Japan would continue to call on the United States to engage on the issue of climate change. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3286 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Donald Trump has no idea WTF he is doing. None. I know, shocking, right? Thankfully, President Obama has decided to take pity on him (or maybe he s really taking pity on us) and is planning to help Trump figure out just how this president gig actually works.After winning the election on Tuesday, Trump visited the White House to meet with Obama and formally begin the process of transition. Sources familiar with the meeting told the Wall Street Journal that it quickly became abundantly clear that Trump was completely clueless. Trump and his team didn t even know that they were responsible for staffing the West Wing. The president has concluded that, for the good of the entire country, he is going to have to help his successor try to learn a thing or two.The WSJ reports: During their private White House meeting on Thursday, Mr. Obama walked his successor through the duties of running the country, and Mr. Trump seemed surprised by the scope, said people familiar with the meeting. Trump aides were described by those people as unaware that the entire presidential staff working in the West Wing had to be replaced at the end of Mr. Obama s term. After meeting with Mr. Trump, the only person to be elected president without having held a government or military position, Mr. Obama realized the Republican needs more guidance. He plans to spend more time with his successor than presidents typically do, people familiar with the matter said. To say that Trump is inexperienced is a grave understatement. He and all the people that he has working for him, who are the best people if you remember, couldn t manage to google this shit? But President Obama, being the true leader that he is, has decided that he will take one for the team and spend his last days in office mentoring the buffoon who will take his place. Thanks, Obama.Featured image via Win McNamee/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3287 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Was it reported by Fox News that the Mar-a-Lago Club owned by Trump received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank? Claim summaries: "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar-a-Lago," a popular post on X read.
contextual information: On Nov. 15, 2023, a user on X with the handle @PatMaguire10 published a post (archived) claiming that Fox News had reported that former U.S. President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, had received a foreclosure notice from Deutsche Bank. We received reader mail asking if this was true. The post read, "BREAKING FOX NEWS: Deutsche Bank has filed a notice to foreclose on Mar A Lago. The Trump property is part of a larger estate lien that is $190 million delinquent. Court documents show a $3.4 billion loan that's in default. Trump hasn't responded to repeated attempts for comment. Developing story." However, a quick check of @PatMaguire10's X bio revealed that the account posts "parody" content. In other words, Fox News did not report on any such foreclosure notice, nor was there any public record of a foreclosure of Mar-a-Lago taking place or scheduled to happen in the future. For a little more background on the subject referenced, on the same day that the post was created, Trump's legal team reportedly asked for a mistrial to be declared in the civil fraud trial brought against him in New York. Weeks earlier, the same trial featured testimony from retired Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh. Haigh provided information to the court about the bank's decision to loan Trump roughly $125 million for the purchase of the Trump National Doral property in Miami in 2011, according to ABC News. As for Mar-a-Lago, the Miami Herald reported in August 2022 that Trump had received a loan from Chase Manhattan Bank, not Deutsche Bank, for his 1985 purchase of the property. Mar-a-Lago itself cost Trump $8 million, which he financed with an $8.5 million loan from Chase Manhattan Bank. The other parcel—oceanfront land next to the manor—cost $2 million. Trump was able to use $500,000 from the estate loan and a $1.5 million mortgage from the seller, Jack C. Massey, to cover the bill. For further reading, we previously published a report titled, "Media Literacy: How Can You Tell if a Post Is Satire/Parody?" | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3288 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: On Tuesday, the day after he won the Republican Party s Iowa caucus, presidential hopeful Ted Cruz admitted that his campaign had sent out an email alert implying that political rival Ben Carson was dropping out of the race.The email warned that Carson was leaving the campaign trail after Iowa, and said that he would be making a formal announcement next week. Recipients of the email were instructed to spread this lie among Carson supporters during the caucuses. Please inform any Carson caucusgoers of this news and urge them to caucus for Ted Cruz. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.As Addicting Info reported here on February 2, Ben Carson told his supporters in a speech on caucus night: For months, my campaign has survived the lies and dirty tricks from opponents who profess to detest the games of the political class, but in reality are masters at it. On Tuesday, Cruz sort of apologized for the deceptive emails, claiming it was all just an innocent mistake on the part of his campaign staff.According to Cruz s statement, circulating false rumors as breaking news is fair game, while circulating the truth just wasn t a priority.Last night when our political team saw the CNN post saying Dr. Carson was not carrying on to New Hampshire and South Carolina, our campaign updated the grassroots leaders just as we would with any breaking news story. That s fair game.What the team should have done is send around the follow-up statement from the Carson campaign clarifying that he was indeed staying in the race when that came out.That was a mistake from our end, and for that I apologize to Dr. Carson.Ted s apology also didn t explain why Carson s follow-up statement, which made it clear that he was not dropping out of the race, wasn t seen as a breaking news story, by the Cruz campaign. But I think we can figure that out for ourselves.Carson wasn t the only candidate to be dogged by dirty republican politics during the Iowa caucuses.A post circulated on social media claimed that Jeb Bush was paying people $25 an hour to fill seats during the caucus.In Des Moines and need some quick money apparently Jeb Bush will pay you to listen to him. pic.twitter.com/NXExjSAB64 Jeff Sadosky (@JeffSadosky) February 1, 2016During Bush s Iowa rally, two men, who later claimed to be paid actors, stood up and began loudly demanding payment for attending the event. We ve been here for two hours and we haven t been paid, one said.Bush responded by having the men escorted out of the rally. Here s video of the men being escorted out, courtesy of the UK s Daily Mail.After the uproar died down, Bush asked the crowd, Have the YR s (Young Republicans) gone yet? He went on to tell the audience That s what we used to do back in the day, we would come to other campaigns and do what they did. Good old GOP family values. Teach the kids how to lie, steal, cheat and con people in order to get what they want.As Jeb himself so plainly put it, following the caucus night debacle, Those are the tactics used by the republican party.And as Carson pointed out, the more they point fingers and accuse others of dirty politics, theFeatured image credit from Gage Skidmore via Flickr | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3289 | 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 This a Poster for a New 'Twilight' Movie? Claim summaries: A poster advertising a forthcoming "Twilight" film was simply a fan tribute.
contextual information: On 14 August 2015, a Facebook user shared what appeared to be a movie poster for a film called Twilight Saga: Moonlight Glow (Part 1) (embedded above). Subsequently, that post was shared hundreds of thousands of times, followed by rumors about a soon-to-be-released Twilight sequel. For example, one user commented, "I have been seeing pictures posted on social media about a new Twilight saga coming in November 2015 called Twilight Moonlight Glow, but when I search for it on the web, I can't find any information about this movie. Is this a hoax?" However, a closer look at the image revealed that the poster was clearly not an indication of new Twilight sequels (which would certainly not be a surprise to fans, were the projects legitimate). As the details illustrate, the date of the film was rendered in a style most commonly seen outside the United States (day/month/year), whereas official Twilight movie posters utilize an American format (month/date/year, as seen here, here, and here). Under the date, a URL led to a DeviantArt user's page, which revealed that the circulating Twilight saga "Moonlight Glow" poster was a creative work of fan tribute and not an official promotional graphic. Moreover, fan interest in a new entry to the series has remained strong enough to warrant significant entertainment news coverage (of which there was none supporting the rumor). The books on which the films were based ended at the same juncture as their cinematic counterparts, so no additional storylines exist for further Twilight adaptations involving the characters of Edward and Bella Cullen. Although author Stephenie Meyer originally planned a novel presenting the events of the series from Edward's perspective (titled Midnight Sun), that project was scrapped after unfinished drafts of the book were leaked online. Finally, rumors of a different November 2015 Twilight sequel (purportedly the third part of the films' final installment, Breaking Dawn, Part 3) had previously circulated. Those claims were unfounded, similarly spread by hopeful fans, and not related to any new projects attached to the franchise. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3290 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: While Republicans continue to reveal their true colors by openly complaining about the release of American prisoners in Iran, President Obama is using his latest diplomatic success to teach his critics a lesson in what effective leadership really looks like.Obama had deliberately waited to talk about the hostage exchange until the American prisoners were out of Iran and safe, but upon news that the swap was a success and that the United Nations had certified that Iran was upholding its end of a landmark nuclear disarmament deal, the White House held a press conference that quickly turned into a teachable moment for those who had irresponsibly advocated for war over diplomacy. This is a good day, because once again we re seeing what s possible with strong American diplomacy, Obama said at the White House. Yesterday marked a milestone in preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, he noted. Most of important of all, we achieved this historic progress through diplomacy, without resorting to another war in the Middle East. And yet, somebody might want to tell the Republican Party that a victory like this without a single shot fired is considered a good thing. The friends at Fox and Friends were practically despondent when they had to tell their audience that the American prisoners in Iran were coming home.A good day for America is a bad one for Fox.Obama s negotiations were a massive blow to their narrative.For years, Republicans have insisted that the only way to get Iran to listen to the United States is through threats of war. Infamously, Republican Sen. John McCain ran for president on the platform of bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran. Even now, certain conservatives regret not being able to send troops into another Middle Eastern conflict. War is a tough addiction to kick.Nobody knows how much Republicans want war than President Obama. He s been boxing out the war-mongers for years. During his comments, he took a dig at those who say war is the only answer.Citing the cooling of tensions with Iran, Obama pointed out that his smart, patient and disciplined approach to the world has yielded results. America can do and has done big things when we work together, Obama said. We can lead this world and make it safer and more secure. But we can only do that if we stop listening to those who think threatening violence will make us look tough. America has tried that approach for decades and the situation with Iran had only been deteriorating. The change in recent months cannot be overstated.The nuclear talks have brought a sense of normalcy to relations with the U.S. and Iran, with top officials from each country in somewhat regular communication. While Obama emphasized that the U.S. continues to have deep concerns about Iran s destabilizing actions in the Middle East and its threats to Israel, he also opened up the prospect of Tehran working more cooperatively with the rest of the world.It s worth noting that those who want war with Iran represent a small minority of Americas mostly Republican politicians and Fox News hosts. It s not a coincidence that McCain s bomb Iran campaign strategy contributed to his being absolutely smoked by Obama s smart, patient and disciplined one in the election. It s also not a big secret that Americans are tired of sending young kids off to die in intractable wars in the Middle East. With the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan finally winding down, it s only those in the GOP who seem eager to embark on a new one.If accomplishing America s goals of neutralizing Iran s nuclear program while avoiding war was the goal and for most of the country, it was then this deal represents a massive success for the country. For the bloodthirsty, it probably stings a little. Obama s clearly not sorry.[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xABl2Aeaycc]Featured image via White House | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3291 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.S. President Donald Trump called Germany’s trade and spending policies “very bad†on Tuesday, intensifying a row between the longtime allies and immediately earning himself the moniker “destroyer of Western values†from a leading German politician. As the war of words threatened to spin out of control, Merkel and other senior German politicians stressed the importance of Germany’s Atlantic ties, with Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel suggesting the spat was just a rough patch. Trump took to Twitter early in the day in the United States to attack Germany, a day after Chancellor Angela Merkel ramped up her doubts about the reliability of Washington as an ally. “We have a MASSIVE trade deficit with Germany, plus they pay FAR LESS than they should on NATO & military. Very bad for U.S. This will change,†Trump tweeted. The tit-for-tat dispute escalated rapidly after Trump, at back-to-back summits last week, criticized major NATO allies over their military spending and refused to endorse a global climate change accord. On Sunday, Merkel showed the gravity of her concern about Washington’s dependability under Trump when she warned, at an election campaign event in a packed Bavarian beer tent | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3292 | 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 .) Let’s turn it over to Thomas Fuller, our San Francisco bureau chief, for today’s introduction. The titans of Silicon Valley like to claim that they’re inventing technology to change the world, and their philanthropic efforts often mirror those big global goals and dreams, with initiatives to end hunger and fight diseases. But the arts in San Francisco haven’t always felt their generosity. Even as total philanthropic spending in the Bay Area has more than doubled over the past decade to around $5 billion, according to the Foundation Center, it’s been difficult for some arts groups to find support with so many organizations competing for attention and funding. Last year, for example, with social inequality such a issue, one heavyweight charitable organization, the James Irvine Foundation, chose to stop spending on the arts and switch all of its future giving toward addressing poverty. The move has important repercussions: In 2015 the Irvine Foundation gave $15. 45 million to the arts, more than a fifth of the foundation’s total grants. So on Tuesday culture fans were given a reason to cheer when the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation announced a plan to spend $8 million on performing arts projects in the Bay Area over the next five years. A panel of experts convened by the foundation will help select 50 works from artists in the Bay Area. The performances will include dance, theater, music and performance art. “There’s much more of a demand for arts than we can hope to fulfill,†said Larry Kramer, the president of the foundation, which gets its funding from the fortune made from one of the founders of the pioneering computer company. “It’s hard to raise money for the arts,†said Ben Mangan, the executive director of the Center for Social Sector Leadership at the University of California, Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. “The arts don’t fall neatly into a category of a problem to solve. †Giving money away is fraught with difficult choices, Mr. Kramer said. “The thing about philanthropy is that there are a million problems that are worth addressing and you can’t address all of them,†he said. (Please note: We regularly highlight articles on news sites that have limited access for nonsubscribers.) • Another round of rain began rolling through Northern California after a powerful weekend storm. [San Francisco Chronicle] • Hundreds of homes along the overflowing Russian River in Sonoma County faced flooding Monday. [The Press Democrat] • The investor Thomas J. Barrack Jr. is among the most influential Californians in Donald J. Trump’s inner circle. [Los Angeles Times] • A United States representative from San Diego yanked a controversial artwork from a Capitol wall. Now he’s being accused of theft. [San Diego ] • San Diego’s ambitious public transit push is slipping further from reach. [KPBS] • “Near historicâ€: The Nuna has built a database of the nation’s 74 million Medicaid patients. [The New York Times] • Yahoo said it would rename itself “Altaba†after selling its internet business. Why Altaba? [The New York Times] • The average “ †in San Francisco is now $920, 000. [SFGate. com] • “Diabolical schemeâ€: A Southern California woman was accused of framing her husband’s . [Los Angeles Times] • The “Hollyweed†prankster surrendered to the police. He said the stunt was for the sake of “art. †[Hollywood Reporter] • Nobody was quite expecting Meryl Streep to lay down the gauntlet for a new kind of culture war. [The New York Times] • West Hollywood’s historic Formosa Cafe closed. But preservation rules mean its exterior cannot be easily altered. [Curbed Los Angeles] • Photo: A dead whale washed up near the Oakland waterfront. [East Bay Times] Hundreds of outdoor walls across Sacramento serve as canvasses for colorful murals. To find them, people have had to rely largely on word of mouth or serendipity. But now, a richly detailed Google map has been published that includes not just their locations, but also images of the works and the names of the artists behind them. The project is the brainchild of Nathaniel Miller, an interactivity editor at The Sacramento Bee. In an interview, Mr. Miller said he used his free time outside of work to research the murals over much of 2016. He portrayed himself as an art novice who was simply in the mood for a project that he thought would be of use. The murals range from the handiwork of elementary school children to interpretations by established artists. All told, Mr. Miller cataloged 420 murals, but he expects that number to grow. Sacramento officials have been embracing public art as a way to enliven the city. During the Sacramento Mural Festival last August, artists were invited to bring blank walls to life at about a dozen places across the city center. Some of the works stretched several stories high. California Today goes live at 6 a. m. Pacific time weekdays. Tell us what you want to see: CAtoday@nytimes. com. The California Today columnist, Mike McPhate, is a Californian — born outside Sacramento and raised in San Juan Capistrano. He lives in Davis. Follow him on Twitter. California Today is edited by Julie Bloom, who grew up in Los Angeles and attended U. C. Berkeley. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3293 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Read by 353 people
One of the worst case scenarios is happening again.
According to reports, Fukushima is being struck again by a tsunami after a large 7.4 earthquake – just updated from reports of a 7.3 earthquake – struck off the main island directly in front of the Fukushima Prefecture where the beleaguered TEPCO nuclear plant is situated.
via CNN : A tsunami warning is in effect for Japan’s Fukushima Prefecture after a 7.3-magnitude earthquake struck off Honshu at 5:59 a.m. Tuesday (3:59 p.m. Monday ET), according to the Japan Meteorological Agency.A tsunami wave of 1-3 meters (3-10 feet) is possible, according to the agency.
Numerous aftershocks, somewhere in the range of 5.0 to 5.4 are being widely reported as well.
According to RT , that tsunami has advanced and has now affected the cooling system at Fukushima. Seriously – this is reportedly happening! Fukushima reactor cooling system stops following quake & tsunami
The cooling system of the third reactor at the Fukushima nuclear power plant has stopped circulating water following a powerful 7.3 offshore earthquake.
Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) told national broadcaster NHK that the cooling system in the Reactor 3 spent fuel pool stopped working. Japan’s national nuclear agency has confirmed that the temperature rise in the pool is “gradual.” The exact cause of the cooling system stoppage is currently unknown. However, the system might have been “shaken” during the earthquake, according to nuclear agency officials, as reported by NHK. No cooling water leaks or any other “abnormalities” have been reported. According to NHK, cooling equipment for the spent nuclear fuel pool in the reactor No. 3 of Tepco’s Fukushima No. 2 power plant has stopped.
— The Japan Times (@japantimes) November 21, 2016
There may still be large waves – potentially as big as 10 feet – that hit the shores of Japan, though the size and extend, and the potential scope of the damage and/or loss of life remains to be seen.
On March 11, 2011 a 9.0 magnitude earthquake struck near Japan and triggered an enormous and devastating tsunami that crippled the nuclear power plant, and exposed that world’s oceans and biosphere to potential contamination.
Fukushima is already an open wound but these new events could exacerbate the problems – or magnify them.
That’s why it is so completely disturbing that the powers that be never properly fixed the problems that were still ongoing after years. The situation at Fukushima Daiichi was never fully contained, and the reactors continued to leak; there is no way to stop the reactions or disable the rods. The authorities simply lied and killed all the press coverage, forcing silence on the issue, except for the online blogosphere, where the issue has lived on as a hotly debated topic that people believe is causing health problems and environmental issues on a widespread basis. RT: Video of blast at Fukushima nuke plant, radiation leak reported 2013:Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Going From Horrible To Horrendous
But whatever has been swept under the rug is likely to come to the forefront if a new tsunami brings massive destruction to Japan’s mainland again.
The failure of the cooling systems is – for now – only the first problem to be acknowledged in news reports. The situation is ongoing, and less than 24 hours have passed.
Considering that the corporate and government authorities in Japan made a concerted effort to silence bad news and pretend the problem away, there is no reason to believe that transparent coverage about what happens after this new earthquake and tsunami will be forthcoming.
So keep your eyes open, and your screen’s recording what is being reported and what other information comes out.
RT has continued live coverage of the events in Japan.
The reality of a potential catastrophe compounding the existing damage at Fukushima, and to everything its waters touch, simply may not be reported.
The powers that be on the Internet, and in the spheres of politics, are going out of their way to censor the grassroots media that thrives online, and are using 21st Century gestapo tactics to silence what they are labeling “false news.”
This story may be updated as more information becomes available.
Flashback: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3294 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Uber’s grand experiment of a car service in its hometown officially lasted only a week. On Wednesday, Uber ended the autonomous car service in San Francisco after defying California officials who had told the company to stop the service because it was illegal. The company lacked the necessary state permits for autonomous driving, state officials have said. In a statement on Wednesday, the company said it ended the pilot program after the California Department of Motor Vehicles revoked the registrations for its cars. “We’re now looking at where we can redeploy these cars but remain 100 percent committed to California and will be redoubling our efforts to develop workable statewide rules,†the company said. Uber has tended to barrel into new markets by flouting local laws, part of a combative approach to expand globally. Uber began a pilot of its experiment in Pittsburgh in September, which is continuing. Yet the defeat in California on vehicles is one of a growing number of setbacks. The company gave up on its own service in China this year, choosing instead to invest in a local incumbent, Didi Chuxing. It has also turned tail or reduced its presence in other markets, including some cities in Germany. A day before Uber began its pilot, state regulators were explicit about their demands that the company adhere to the rules. In a statement on Dec. 13 about the testing of autonomous vehicles, the Department of Motor Vehicles said: “We have a permitting process in place to ensure public safety as this technology is being tested. Twenty manufacturers have already obtained permits to test hundreds of cars on California roads. Uber shall do the same. †Nonetheless, as recently as Friday, Uber remained defiant. It said that it had no intention of ending its test and that its cars were still on the road and picking up passengers. Uber officials contended that under the letter of California law, the company did not need a permit because the Motor Vehicles Department defined autonomous vehicles as those that drive “without the active physical control or monitoring of a natural person. †Uber said its modified, Volvo XC90s required human oversight, and therefore did not fit California’s definition of an autonomous vehicle. Companies such as Google and Tesla Motors have all gotten such permits. “This rule just doesn’t apply to us,†Anthony Levandowski, vice president of Uber’s advanced technologies group, said in a conference call with reporters last week. “You don’t need to wear a belt and suspenders and whatever else if you’re wearing a dress. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3295 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Since 2011, VNN has operated as part of the Veterans Today Network ; a group that operates over 50 plus media, information and service online sites for U.S. Military Veterans. Democrats should ask Clinton to step aside By VNN on October 31, 2016 The newly opened FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server marks "a potential Constitutional crisis" for the country.
Chicago Tribune
Has America become so numb by the decades of lies and cynicism oozing from Clinton Inc. that it could elect Hillary Clinton as president, even after Friday’s FBI announcement that it had reopened an investigation of her emails while secretary of state?
We’ll find out soon enough.
It’s obvious the American political system is breaking down. It’s been crumbling for some time now, and the establishment elite know it and they’re properly frightened. Donald Trump , the vulgarian at their gates, is a symptom, not a cause. Hillary Clinton and husband Bill are both cause and effect.
FBI director James Comey ‘s announcement about the renewed Clinton email investigation is the bombshell in the presidential campaign. That he announced this so close to Election Day should tell every thinking person that what the FBI is looking at is extremely serious.
This can’t be about pervert Anthony Weiner and his reported desire for a teenage girl. But it can be about the laptop of Weiner’s wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin , and emails between her and Hillary. It comes after the FBI investigation in which Comey concluded Clinton had lied and been “reckless” with national secrets, but said he could not recommend prosecution.
So what should the Democrats do now?
If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process:
They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in her place.
Democrats should say, honestly, that with a new criminal investigation going on into events around her home-brew email server from the time she was secretary of state, having Clinton anywhere near the White House is just not a good idea.
Since Oct. 7, WikiLeaks has released 35,000 emails hacked from Clinton campaign boss John Podesta . Now WikiLeaks, no longer a neutral player but an active anti-Clinton agency, plans to release another 15,000 emails.
What if she is elected? Think of a nation suffering a bad economy and continuing chaos in the Middle East, and now also facing a criminal investigation of a president. Add to that congressional investigations and a public vision of Clinton as a Nixonian figure wandering the halls, wringing her hands.
The best thing would be for Democrats to ask her to step down now. It would be the most responsible thing to do, if the nation were more important to them than power. And the American news media — fairly or not firmly identified in the public mind as Mrs. Clinton’s political action committee — should begin demanding it.
But what will Hillary do?
She’ll stick and ride this out and turn her anger toward Comey. For Hillary and Bill Clinton, it has always been about power, about the Clinton Restoration and protecting fortunes already made by selling nothing but political influence.
She’ll remind the nation that she’s a woman and that Donald Trump said terrible things about women. If there is another notorious Trump video to be leaked, the Clintons should probably leak it now. Then her allies in media can talk about misogyny and sexual politics and the headlines can be all about Trump as the boor he is and Hillary as champion of female victims, which she has never been.
Remember that Bill Clinton leveraged the “Year of the Woman.” Then he preyed on women in the White House and Hillary protected him. But the political left — most particularly the women of the left — defended him because he promised to protect abortion rights and their other agendas.
If you take a step back from tribal politics, you’ll see that Mrs. Clinton has clearly disqualified herself from ever coming near classified information again. If she were a young person straight out of grad school hoping to land a government job, Hillary Clinton would be laughed out of Washington with her record. She’d never be hired.
As secretary of state she kept classified documents on the home-brew server in her basement, which is against the law. She lied about it to the American people. She couldn’t remember details dozens of times when questioned by the FBI. Her aides destroyed evidence by BleachBit and hammers. Her husband, Bill, met secretly on an airport tarmac with Attorney General Loretta Lynch for about a half-hour, and all they said they talked about was golf and the grandkids.
And there was no prosecution of Hillary.
That isn’t merely wrong and unethical. It is poisonous.
And during this presidential campaign, Americans were confronted with a two-tiered system of federal justice: one for standards for the Clintons and one for the peasants.
I’ve always figured that, as secretary of state, Clinton kept her home-brew email server — from which foreign intelligence agencies could hack top secret information — so she could shield the influence peddling that helped make the Clintons several fortunes.
The Clintons weren’t skilled merchants. They weren’t traders or manufacturers. The Clintons never produced anything tangible. They had no science, patents or devices to make them millions upon millions of dollars. FBI’s Comey acted out of ‘obligation’ to lawmakers, fear of leak to media
All they had to sell, really, was influence. And they used our federal government to leverage it.
If a presidential election is as much about the people as it is about the candidates, then we’ll learn plenty about ourselves in the coming days, won’t we?
Listen to the Chicago Way podcast with John Kass and Jeff Carlin. Guests are Tribune cartoonist Scott Stantis and former White House Chief of Staff William Daley: www.chicagotribune.com/kasspod | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3296 | 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: Donald Trump on Obamacare Claim summaries: Rumor: Donald Trump issued a pithy criticism of Obamacare.
contextual information: Claim: Donald Trump issued a pithy criticism of Obamacare. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, July 2012] I recently read an article on facebook attributed to Donald Trump about Obamacare. Here it is: Let me get this straight...We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't, which purportedly covers at least ten million more people, without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress who didn't read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government who has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke!!!! Origins: In the wake of a June 2012 Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of health care reform legislation commonly known as Obamacare, the above-quoted criticism of that legislation began circulating online, commonly attributed to business magnate Donald Trump. This item saw renewed circulation in mid-2015, when Trump announced his candidacy for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. However, this criticism didn't originate with any public statement made by Donald Trump: it's an anonymous bit of political humor that has been posted and reposted many times in blogs and social media since at least as far back as March 2010. posted reposted A number of sources (such as Fox News and CNSNews.com) have erroneously attributed credit for this quip to Dr. Barbara Bellar, an Illinois State Senate candidate who used it in a speech she delivered at a Chicago Women for Romney rally in August 2012. However, as noted above, this bit had already been repeatedly posted to online sites for more than two years before Dr. Bellar incorporated it into her 2012 speech (and she has acknowledged that she was not its originator): Fox News CNSNews.com acknowledged So let me get this straight. This is a long sentence. We are going to be gifted with a health care plan that we are forced to purchase, and fined if we don't, which reportedly covers 10 million more people without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman doesn't understand it, passed by Congress, that didn't read it, but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a president who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, for which we will be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese and financed by a country that is broke. So what the blank could possibly go wrong? Last updated: 8 July 2015 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD3297 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: On the right, Evangelical voters see the need to make political compromises. On the left, morality is increasingly seen through secular eyes.
Though religion still creates clear fault lines among American voters, the importance of a candidate’s own religiousness is declining rapidly.
Two-thirds of Evangelicals are planning to vote for Donald Trump, and two-thirds of religiously unaffiliated “nones†are saying they will support Hillary Clinton, according to a Pew Research Center study released Wednesday.
But the share of Americans who want a president with strong religious beliefs is down 10 percentage points – to 62 percent – from 2008. And the trend is apparent on both sides: the percentage of Republicans who say it is important for a president to be religious is down eight points since 2008. For Democrats, it’s down 13 points.
Yet, for each side, the reasons for the decline differ. On the Republican side, Evangelicals are willing to embrace less-religious candidates in order to maintain political clout, while the growing “nones†of the Democratic Party have shifted to emphasize secular morality over traditional religion.
“For two election cycles now we’ve seen a steady decline in the number of Americans who care if the president has strong beliefs,†says Greg Smith, co-author of the study. “Maybe the attitudes of some religious groups are changing, but more so the religious composition of the entire country is changing.â€
Evangelicals have long faced the conundrum of choosing a purist candidate versus choosing a candidate who has broader appeal. Mr. Trump is an example of that – though for some Evangelicals, he represents a particularly big compromise, given his lack of religiosity and playboy lifestyle.
“Evangelicals know that Trump is not the Ted Cruz candidate,†says Chad Seales, a professor of religion at the University of Texas, Austin, and an expert on Southern Evangelicals. “He is not the religious right candidate of the 1990s, but they are making all kinds of concessions to agree with him and reframe him in their world. Trump is the cultural option. There is no doctrine option left.â€
Last month, evangelical leader James Dobson called Trump “a baby Christian†and fellow religious leader Ralph Reed said “we accept him for who he is now†because he has showed a commitment to Christian ways.
“He may not be against abortion for evangelical purposes, but we’ll take the end result even it it’s not by the same means,†says Laurie Maffly-Kipp of Washington University’s John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics. “When push comes to shove, there has never been a Republican front-runner who has been a pure Evangelical. I think they have compromised before.â€
Mitt Romney, a devout Mormon and 2012 Republican presidential nominee, is the latest example of how Evangelicals compromised, embracing a Mormon and a former blue-state governor, note numerous experts.
More recently, the senior pastor of First Baptist Dallas, Robert Jeffress, focused on secular – not theological – similarities in his endorsement of Donald Trump.
“It was never seamless, but the reason it was so successful was that it was able to push the numbers of the Republican Party over the majority – its voting bloc was powerful and cohesive enough,†adds Professor Seales.
But now, he adds, Evangelicals are willing merely to back the political positions, even if there is concern about a lack of religious conviction behind them – as in Trump’s case.
On the other side, the rise of the “nones†appears to be beginning to have an effect. In 2012, 25 percent of Americans claimed no religious preference. In the late 1980s, the number was 7 percent.
That could be at least partly a reaction to the intense fusing of theological doctrine and politics among religious conservatives, suggests Michael Hout, a sociologist at New York University.
“Many ‘new nones’ were people raised Baptist or Catholic but not active,†he says. “As those churches became more overtly political over issues like abortion, inactive liberals who used to identify, quit doing so.â€
But experts say Democrats are also increasingly viewing morality outside of religiousness.
“Nones†were among Bernie Sanders's strongest supporters in the primary, notes Mr. Smith of Pew. They were drawn to his vision of a society that takes better care of all – from free college to healthcare to a higher minimum wage.
Moreover, they saw him as a plain speaker whom they could trust. For that reason, they are slow to warm to Clinton’s campaign, with the allegations of email misuse and her connections to Wall Street.
“This is a sign of nervousness about her moral character – which is important because there is a kind of linkage between moral values and leadership,†says Mark Valeri, a professor of religion and politics at the Danforth Center at Washington University.
The result is a curious situation in which Democrats appear to be more worried about the morality of their candidate than Republicans are.
“On the right, Republican, pro-Trump side there is less attention to the personal morality of the leader,†says Professor Valeri. “But because on the progressive side they do reach for high moral reform, there is a desire that Clinton be able to present herself well motivated morally. That’s why the emails, the testimony, the charges, are sticking so hard.†| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3298 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Zimbabwe s new president Emmerson Mnangagwa dropped his education minister, a day after reappointing him to a cabinet which gave top posts to senior military officials in what was widely seen as a reward for the army s role in the removal of his predecessor, Robert Mugabe. Mnangagwa made other changes to the cabinet that his chief secretary Misheck Sibanda called adjustments to ensure compliance with the Constitution and considerations of gender, demography and special needs . Under the Zimbabwean constitution, ministers and their deputies have to be members of parliament, except five who can be chosen for their professional skills and competence. Mnangagwa had named as ministers seven people, including Major-General Sibusiso Moyo as foreign minister and Marshall Perrance Shiri to the sensitive land portfolio, who are not lawmakers. He replaced primary and higher education minister Lazaraus Dokora with his deputy Paul Mavima. Dokora s reappointment had caused an outcry from Zimbabweans on social media and radio shows who slammed him for poor performance and undermining the country s education system. He also named ZANU-PF lawmaker Petronella Kagonye to the labor and social welfare portfolio, replacing university professor Clever Nyathi who was appointed special advisor in the president s office on national peace and reconciliation. Chris Mutsvanga, leader of the powerful war veterans association and who was named media, information and broadcast minister, has also been appointed special advisor to the president. Sworn in as president last Friday after 93-year-old Mugabe quit in the wake of a de facto military coup, Mnangagwa s cabinet drew criticisms from analysts and Zimbabweans who had expected a more broad-based lineup that marked a break from the Mugabe era. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD3299 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said on Thursday U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as Israel s capital was not helpful and that the world would like to see some serious announcements from President Donald Trump on how to resolve Middle Eastern issues. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.