Category: Fact Check

Social media users are claiming White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is rewriting history about the United States’ and Ukraine’s roles during World War II.

A May 9 Facebook post shared a video of a White House press briefing in which Andrew Feinberg, White House correspondent for The Independent, a British news outlet, appears to ask Jean-Pierre about the U.S. not condemning Nazi symbolism in Ukraine. The video included Russian subtitles.

In response, Jean-Pierre appears to say, “Seventy-nine years ago, the United States and our Ukrainian allies joined forces to combat the oppressive regimes of (Adolf) Hitler and (Joseph) Stalin. While Berlin is now an ally, the threat from the east persists. That’s why we’re committed to standing by Ukraine and offering our full support in any way we can.”

The Facebook post’s caption read, “OMG, the anti-Russian misinformation has gotten so deep that the White House press secretary is rewriting the history of WWII saying the US (and Ukraine) fought against both Hitler and Stalin.”

(Screengrab from Facebook)

This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

The video’s audio was edited. This exchange about World War II between the journalist and Jean-Pierre didn’t happen.

The same video was shared May 8 on X, where it had been viewed more than 550,000 times by May 9. It was marked with a community note that said the audio was fake. The video also had been shared on a pro-Russia Telegram channel, Newsweek reported.

In footage from the real May 7 White House press briefing that the fake video altered, Feinberg asked about the White House’s plans to persuade Israel to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza. Jean-Pierre said President Joe Biden has been in contact with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about reopening the Kerem Shalom border crossing to get humanitarian aid into Gaza.

World War II, Hilter and Stalin were not mentioned during this press briefing.

During World War II, the U.S. was allied with the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany. The U.S. did not fight with Ukraine, which was occupied by German forces during most of the war. Ukraine was returned to Soviet control in 1944.

We rate the claim that Jean-Pierre said the United States and Ukraine won World War II Pants on Fire!

Kelly Clarkson hasn’t promoted diet products, but her likeness is repeatedly used in connection with supposed silver bullets such as keto and weight loss gummies. Fabricated quotes endorsing them often are attributed to the singer. 

 A May 6 Facebook post claims that Clarkson has had enough. 

“In an interview with People magazine, the singer and daytime talk show host said she will file a lawsuit over Keto ads on Facebook,” the post’s caption said  

A link in the post says “Kelly files lawsuit over ketone products” and text over a photo of Clarkson says, “I will sue the Keto Scam.” 

But the link  leads to neither an interview nor evidence to support that claim; it leads to yet another keto scam. 

This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

The Facebook post was shared by an account that changed its name May 6 to “Kelly Law Firm.” According to the account’s information page, it’s a “mental health service” that uses photos of Clarkson for its profile pictures.

The post’s link leads to a webpage that looks like a May 9 Facebook post from Clarkson. But it’s not a real Facebook post — and has it has  “kelly-sues-keto.info” as a URL. The page’s text is identical to others we’ve checked before, and describes Clarkson’s success with a “slimming supplement” while decrying other scams. 

“Due to my huge changes,” the page says, “there are many scams selling weight loss products under my name, and many of my fans have been deceived, so I will sue the fraud companies that used my photos to recover the defrauded funds for my fans. If you have been scammed, please leave your name and phone number below my main post. After the funds are recovered, I will have my assistant contact you!”

This statement doesn’t appear on Clarkson’s actual Facebook page, or anywhere credible. 

Melissa Kates, Clarkson’s publicist, didn’t respond to PolitiFact’s questions about the post. But she has told The Associated Press that Clarkson “does not have any affiliation as a spokesperson” for any “weight loss products/programs.” 

We found no story on People’s website — or anywhere — in which Clarkson announces a lawsuit against a keto scam, though there are plenty of posts about her weight and that of other celebrities.

We rate claims that Clarkson told People she’s suing over keto scams False.

 

It’s a bird! It’s a plane! It’s the planet Venus — or is it?

An April 29 Facebook post shared a photo that claimed to show the “clearest image ever taken of Venus.”

The photo shows a hazy, yellow atmosphere, rocky terrain, small hills in the distance and part of the space probe that supposedly took the image.

This Facebook post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

(Screengrab from Facebook)

Although parts of this image derive from real photos of Venus, the image has been altered multiple times to give the appearance of what the planet’s landscape may look like.

A reverse-image search using TinEye traced this photo to a black-and-white version described as a “perspective image mosaic” on a website created by Donald P. Mitchell, a U.S.-based retired scientific researcher.

The left image is from the misleading Facebook post and the right image is from Donald P. Mitchell’s website.

Mitchell said on his website that he created images of Venus’ surface using raw imagery data from Venera 13, a Soviet Union space probe launched in 1981. Mitchell said on X in 2020 that he obtained this data from “friends in the Russian science community.”

After Venera 13 landed on Venus, the space probe gathered data and took photos for two hours before breaking under the planet’s harsh conditions. Venus, the second-closest planet to the sun, has the solar system’s hottest temperatures among planets.

Venera 13 took almost two dozen color and black-and-white panoramic photographs of Venus’ surface. The color photos have a yellow tone. NASA said Venus’ true color is difficult to determine because the planet’s atmosphere filters out blue light.

(Screengrab from Donald P. Mitchell’s website)

In the space probe’s panoramic photos, Venus’ rocky surface is visible, along with slivers of the atmosphere.

Space.com reported in 2006 that Mitchell processed and edited these panoramic images in several stages. “To produce the images, Mitchell mixed in special purpose source code, resampling, and other image wizardry, along with knowledge about dimensions of the Venera lander and location of its camera lens,” Space.com reported.

Mitchell said on his website that he edited the panoramic images using Adobe Photoshop “to produce views that give a better subjective impression of the Venusian surface.”

In 2019, Mitchell explained his process on X. He said the original panoramic images were “reprojected into perspective by a custom C++ program.” (C++ is a programming language used for software, game and database development.) The images were then assembled in Photoshop, and “missing pieces were filled by duplicates and reversed duplicates,” he said.

“So there is a little artistic license … but not very much,” Mitchell told Space.com in 2006.

Through Mitchell’s photo editing, details not seen in the original Soviet space probe photos were revealed, including distant hills on Venus, Space.com reported. 

Mitchell told Agence France-Presse in 2021 that although he created the black-and-white landscape images of Venus, “the colorized images are done by other people.”

Our ruling

A Facebook post claims a photo shows the “clearest image ever taken of Venus.”

This is not a genuine photo. A researcher constructed a black-and-white version of this photo by editing original space probe images with a programming language and Photoshop. The researcher said someone else colored the photo bright yellow.

We rate this claim False.

A political action committee supporting former President Donald Trump’s reelection launched an ad that claims President Joe Biden is paying rent for immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. 

The online video ad shows an actor playing the role of a Biden campaign worker on the phone with a voter. 

“Biden’s helping pay rent for newcomers to America,” the supposed campaign worker says. The video then focuses on a script the campaign worker is reading, which partly says, “do not say immigrants.”

“You mean illegal immigrants?” the supposed voter on the phone responds. “I’m struggling to pay my bills but Biden’s paying rent for illegals?” 

MAGA Inc.’s 30-second ad cites a Daily Mail article about Michigan’s Newcomer Rental Subsidy program, which the Office of Global Michigan runs under the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity. The program provides certain eligible immigrants up to $500 per month in rental subsidies for up to a year. (The subsidies are directly provided to the landlords.) 

But federal funding for the program cannot be used to help people in the U.S. illegally, a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson told PolitIFact. 

What Michigan says about program eligibility 

The website for Michigan’s Newcomer Rental Subsidy program says beneficiaries “must have an eligible immigration status as defined by the Office of Refugee Resettlement,” which is part of the U.S. Health and Human Services. 

This includes refugees, Ukrainians and Afghans allowed into the U.S. under humanitarian parole programs and asylees — people who have been granted asylum in its list. People in these categories are in the U.S. legally.

The Office of Global Michigan approves only residents who are in the country legally as determined by the federal government, said Jason Moon, communications director for Michigan’s Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity.

However, on its website, the Office of Global Michigan lists additional groups that are also eligible for the rental subsidies (these groups are not included in the Office of Refugee Resettlement’s eligibility list):

• Beneficiaries of a humanitarian parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans: Every month, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security allows up to 30,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to enter the U.S. legally under humanitarian parole. This official permission lets people live and work legally in the U.S. for up to two years.

• People with pending asylum applications: People who cross the U.S. border illegally and are apprehended by immigration officials can seek “defensive” asylum in immigration court. This means they are defending themselves against a formal deportation order and are trying to stay in the U.S. by getting asylum. But this isn’t a group that is eligible for Michigan’s program, the Office of Global Michigan told The Washington Post and the Detroit Free Press. This distinction isn’t mentioned on the state office’s website. And when PolitiFact asked the office for the information, a spokesperson pointed us to the other outlets’ articles.

People with “affirmative” asylum applications are the ones eligible for the rent assistance, the Detroit Free Press reported. People apply for asylum affirmatively when they are not in official deportation proceedings. 

MAGA Inc.’s argument, and why it doesn’t prove the claim to be true

Alex Pfeiffer, MAGA Inc.’s communications director, told PolitiFact that allowing people with pending asylum applications and with humanitarian parole to qualify for Michigan’s program is evidence that Biden is subsidizing the rent of people who are in the U.S. illegally.

Pfeiffer said the Department of Homeland Security said people allowed into the U.S. under the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela parole program were considered “inadmissible” into the country. He referred to a DHS document responding to a House Committee on Homeland Security subpoena. 

The subpoena requested the number of parole program applicants who received a travel authorization, traveled to the U.S. and were found inadmissible at a port of entry. 

“All individuals paroled into the United States are, by definition, inadmissible” under the U.S. immigration system, including those paroled under the program for Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela nationals, DHS said in its response to the House committee subpoena.

But that doesn’t mean that the parolees are here illegally. 

The immigration parole gives people who otherwise wouldn’t be allowed to enter permission to temporarily enter the U.S., said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, policy analyst at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. 

“People allowed into the U.S. through parole are legally entering, and they are allowed to stay for the parole period,” Bush-Joseph said. “After that, they need to apply to renew their parole or for another status such as asylum.”

Therefore, that beneficiaries of the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela humanitarian parole program qualify for the Michigan rental subsidy is not evidence that Biden is paying rent for immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

What about people with pending asylum applications?

Michigan’s program allows affirmative asylum seekers to apply for rent assistance.

Just because someone applied for affirmative asylum does not necessarily mean that person is in the U.S. legally, immigration law experts told PolitiFact. However, this alone isn’t evidence that Biden is subsidizing rent for immigrants in the U.S. illegally; that’s because federal funding cannot be used on asylum applicants.

Michigan’s program began in October 2023. So far, none of the 1,200 immigrants who have benefited have pending asylum applications or entered the U.S. under the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela humanitarian parole program, according to data The Washington Post and the Detroit Free Press received from the Michigan’s Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity. Most beneficiaries are refugees or Afghan arrivals. 

The Michigan agency did not share this data with PolitiFact but referred us to the other outlets’ reporting.

How Michigan’s program is funded

Federal and state dollars fund Michigan’s Newcomer Rental Subsidy program. Federal funding comes from the U.S. Treasury Department and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. State funding for the program comes from the Michigan State Housing Development Authority Housing and Community Development Fund.

The federal funds cannot be used on asylum seekers, a Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson told PolitiFact.

We don’t have a breakdown of how Michigan’s agencies are using the federal money. But MAGA Inc.’s spokesperson also did not provide evidence proving that federal dollars were used to subsidize rents for people here illegally.

For decades, the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement has funded nonprofit and state-run assistance programs for eligible immigrants, such as refugees and asylees. These services include job training programs, English classes and child care.  

A White House spokesperson told PolitiFact there is no federal government program that provides rental assistance to asylum seekers. 

Our ruling

A MAGA Inc. ad, citing a Michigan rental subsidy program, claimed Biden is paying rent for immigrants illegally in the country.

A Michigan agency told PolitiFact that only people in the U.S. legally qualify for a rent assistance program that’s funded with state and federal money.

But a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson told PolitiFact that federal funds cannot be used for people who entered the U.S. illegally, or who have pending asylum applications.  

Beneficiaries of a humanitarian parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans are also eligible for the rent subsidies. But people under that program entered the U.S. legally.

No beneficiaries from that parole program or people with pending asylum applications have benefited from the rental subsidy program so far.

MAGA Inc. provided no evidence directly linking federal funds to rental assistance for people in the U.S. illegally.

We rate MAGA Inc.’s claim False. ​

President Joe Biden repeated several claims about the economy during a May 8 interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett. 

A day earlier, PolitiFact published a similar assessment of claims about the economy made by former President Donald Trump, Biden’s expected challenger in November, in an interview with WGAL-TV in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. 

Here’s a rundown of Biden’s remarks in the CNN interview.

“I have created over 15 million jobs since I have been president.” 

Biden is right on the number — the nation has seen employment increase by about 15.37 million jobs since he was inaugurated — but claiming credit by saying he did it is an exaggeration.

Presidents can help shape the economy by enacting a policy agenda. But a president’s power to influence the economy is limited. Other factors play roles as well, including international economic trends and energy prices.

“Other than Herbert Hoover, (Trump is) the only other president who lost more jobs than created in his four- year term.” 

This needs context.

During Trump’s presidency, the U.S. lost a net 2.7 million jobs. In comparison, every president since Harry Truman (who served from 1945 to 1953) has gained jobs during his tenure. 

But when looking at job creation patterns under a president, timing matters — a lot. And Biden’s statement ignores that Trump’s tenure ended amid a once-in-a-century pandemic, which caused significant economic disruption.

Before the pandemic, Trump oversaw a 4.6% employment increase. That trails the rise during the equivalent time period for Biden (about 10%) and Bill Clinton (about 8.1%), but it’s more than the stagnation or shrinkage under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

The pandemic wiped out the first three years of job gains under Trump. Almost 58% of the lost jobs were back by the time Trump left office in January 2021, but his 2020 loss to Biden meant he didn’t get to regain the rest.

“We have got 1,000 billionaires in America. You know what their average federal tax is? 8.3%.”

The number of billionaires in the U.S., according to Forbes, is a little lower than that — 735 as of last year. But Biden’s claim about the tax rate is more problematic.

The White House previously told PolitiFact that the figure comes from a White House report that looked at what would happen if the United States were to tax unrealized gains on stocks. Currently, if people see their stock shares rise in value over time, those gains are not taxed unless and until the shares are sold. If the shares are never sold, then they are never taxed, and under current law — which Biden has proposed changing — they may be passed on to the next generation with little or no taxation. 

The White House report found that if you include unrealized gains in the income calculations of the 400 richest U.S. families, then their taxes paid would account for just 8.2% of their income.

Economists and policymakers have long debated whether the government should tax unrealized gains. But Biden made it sound as if 8% was the standard rate today, not what would happen under a future proposal. 

So, what is the actual tax burden under the current tax code for the wealthiest Americans? IRS data from 2019 shows that the top 1% of taxpayers paid an average federal income tax rate of 25.6%, or about three times more than the White House’s estimate. A more elite group, the top 0.001% — which in 2019 meant people earning about $60 million annually or more — paid a percentage that was only modestly smaller, 22.9%.

“We can further reduce the deficit, which I have been able to reduce.” 

This needs context.

Biden has presided over smaller deficits than Trump did in his final year. However, Biden omits important context about the unusual federal spending that both presidents approved to stabilize the country during the coronavirus pandemic. 

During Trump’s presidency, the deficit rose from $666 billion in 2017, his first year in office, to $984 billion in 2019, his third year.

But the coronavirus pandemic sent the annual deficit into record territory. In 2020, Trump’s fourth year, the deficit skyrocketed to $3.13 trillion, largely because of government stimulus payments, unemployment insurance expansions, business operation grants and increased funding for public health.

The deficit remained high in 2021, another significant pandemic year. That year, the newly elected Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act, which provided more money for the pandemic response. In 2021, the deficit fell but remained historically high, at $2.78 trillion.

The deficit declines were greater during Biden’s second and third years in office, as vaccines and therapies cut the risks associated with COVID-19 and the economy fully reopened. The deficit was about $1.38 trillion in 2022 and $1.7 trillion in 2023.

Still, even at these reduced levels, the deficit remains higher under Biden than it was before the pandemic. The deficit in 2022 and 2023 under Biden was higher than in each of Trump’s first three years, partly because of bills such as the 2021 American Rescue Plan.

The same pattern emerges when the deficit is compared with the U.S. gross domestic product, a common measure of the economy’s overall size. 

“We have the strongest economy in the world. Let me say it again, in the world.” 

A reasonable argument can be made that the U.S. is doing better economically than its industrialized peers. 

Although there’s no surefire metric to measure the world’s strongest economy, the most basic one is gross domestic product, which is the sum of all economic activity within a country. 

In 2023, the U.S. easily outpaced the other countries in the G7, with an annual increase of 2.5%,  higher than in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. The International Monetary Fund projects that the U.S. will continue outpacing these six nations in gross domestic product growth in 2024 and 2025.

Meanwhile, despite the inability to wrench inflation back to the Federal Reserve’s 2% benchmark, the U.S. is faring reasonably well against inflation compared with other G7 nations.

Comparing the U.S. with the other six nations on an apples-to-apples basis shows that only Italy and Canada achieved a lower inflation rate than the U.S. (In Canada’s case, it was just 0.02% lower.) The other four G7 countries — France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom — all had higher inflation rates. 

Meanwhile, a broader group of more modestly sized but industrialized nations that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development averaged inflation rates that were two full percentage points higher than the United States’.

Inflation “was 9% when I came to office.” 

Inflation did hit 9% during Biden’s tenure — the highest in about four decades — but it reached that level about a year and a half into his presidency. When Biden was inaugurated, year-over-year inflation was about 1.4%. From January 2021 to June 2022, inflation rose precipitously, primarily because of pandemic-related supply-chain difficulties and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, exacerbated by federal spending from Biden’s American Rescue Plan.

The White House told PolitiFact that Biden’s point was that the factors that caused inflation, such as semiconductor shortages, were in place when he took office.

“Look at the Michigan survey, where 65% of the American people think they’re in good shape economically. They think the nation’s not in good shape, but they’re personally in good shape.” 

Biden’s general point is accurate, but he misstated the specific poll numbers.

Biden appears to be referring to a poll cited in a March 18 New York Times column by economist Paul Krugman. The poll, by Quinnipiac University, found that 35% respondents said the national economy was excellent or good while 65% said it was not so good or bad. By contrast, 61% said their personal finances were in excellent or good shape, with 38% saying they were in not so good or bad shape.

However, this was a poll of Michigan voters, not voters across the country, as Biden said.

Still, Biden’s underlying point is borne out elsewhere.

The monthly University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment survey, which surveys Americans nationally, shows people feel greater satisfaction with personal finances than with the national economy.

“The idea that you bounce a check and you get a $30 fee for bouncing the check, well, I changed that. You can’t charge more than 8 bucks for that. Or your credit card, your late payment, $35.” 

Biden has proposed these changes. The credit card rule has been enacted, but the check rule is still undergoing review.

After completing a public comment period, the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has issued a rule that limits the late fees charged by credit card issuers to $8. The rule takes effect May 14.

Meanwhile, the agency proposed a rule in January for check bouncing fees, but it still needs to be finalized, including public comment. The agency said the typical fee of $35 for an overdraft loan exceeds the typical amount of the overdraft, which averages $26. It is seeking comment on whether $3, $6, $7 or $14 is the appropriate amount going forward.

If and when the rules are implemented, critics of the new regulations could sue to block them.

“Snickers bar, they did a thing, and it’s like 20% less for the same price.”

When Biden made this claim during the State of the Union address in March, Mars Inc., the company that makes Snickers bars, rebutted Biden’s claim in a statement shared widely on X. 

“We have not reduced the size of Snickers singles or share size in the U.S. Like many industries, we continue to face high inflation and spikes in materials costs; however, we work to absorb these extra costs wherever possible to provide affordable treats at the best value,” the company said.

In the CNN interview, Biden mentioned the Shinkflation Prevention Act, a bill Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., proposed in February to “to crack down on corporations that deceive consumers by selling smaller sizes of their products without lowering the prices.”

PolitiFact Copy Chief Matthew Crowley contributed to this report.

Sen. Rick Scott, R, Fla. is joining other Republican lawmakers and social media users and blaming President Joe Biden for using taxpayer dollars to fly immigrants into the U.S.

“Joe Biden flew hundreds of thousands of illegals into Florida last year,” Scott, wrote May 4 on X, linking to a Fox News article.

Scott is criticizing a Biden humanitarian parole program for immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. 

Scott’s post gives the impression that Biden is paying for the humanitarian parole beneficiaries’ flights. But, as we’ve previously fact-checked, the program’s beneficiaries must pay for their own travel to the United States, and they’re not in the U.S. illegally. 

Scott’s communications director, McKinley Lewis, responded to PolitiFact’s request for more information with a question about CBP One, a U.S. government app that humanitarian parole beneficiaries can use to see information about their cases.

“Is there an argument that this travel, which allows illegal aliens to use the DHS CBP One App in lieu of government-issued ID, is not authorized by the Biden administration?” Lewis asked PolitiFact.

Humanitarian parole beneficiaries do not use the app “in lieu” of a government-issued ID. To qualify for the program, people must have unexpired passports issued by their countries’ governments that are valid for international travel, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said. 

Biden program allows entry to eligible immigrants from four countries

In January 2023, the U.S. started accepting 30,000 people monthly from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela under a humanitarian parole program. The program, an expansion of an October 2022 initiative for Venezuelans, lets people legally enter, live and work in the U.S. for two years. To qualify, migrants need a U.S. sponsor and to meet other requirements. 

Although people paroled in are authorized to be in the U.S., the Department of Homeland Security can terminate their parole if they violate U.S. laws. People who overstay a parole period also can be deported. 

As of March 2024, the latest month with available data, 404,000 people have entered the U.S. through the program, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said. 

People allowed into the U.S. through this parole program do not receive free flights to the country; rather, they buy their own plane tickets, Nicole Hallett, a University of Chicago Law School professor, told PolitiFact in March.

People entering the U.S. through the parole program are in the country legally

In April, the Republican-led House Homeland Security Committee subpoenaed the Department of Homeland Security, requesting information and data on the humanitarian parole program.  The Fox News article Scott linked to in his X post includes eight pages of the department’s response to the committee. 

The committee asked DHS for the monthly number of parole program applicants “from each country for which travel authorization was issued who were found to be inadmissible at a port of entry but released into the United States.”

DHS responded that “all individuals paroled into the United States are, by definition, inadmissible.” 

But this doesn’t mean the people who entered the U.S. under the humanitarian parole program are in the country illegally.

“People allowed into the U.S. through parole are legally entering,” said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, policy analyst at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute. Parole gives people who would otherwise not be allowed into the U.S. temporary permission to enter.

Even though parole is an official permission to enter and temporarily stay in the U.S., it’s not considered a formal admission into the country under immigration law, the Congressional Research Service wrote in a 2020 report. 

“An admission occurs when an immigration officer allows a noncitizen to enter the United States pursuant to a visa or another entry document, without the limitation of parole,” the American Immigration Council, an immigrant-rights advocacy group said in a 2022 report. 

People in the U.S. under parole have a temporary lawful presence in the country, but they do not have a lawful status or a pathway to U.S. citizenship. That means once they enter the country, people under parole programs must apply for a legal status, such as asylum. 

Destinations for immigrants arriving through the parole program 

In its subpoena response, the Department of Homeland Security said 200,000 people arrived at U.S. airports from January 2023 to August 2023 and were paroled into the country.

More than 161,000 entered the U.S. through Florida airports, particularly Miami International Airport, which is a hub for flights from Latin America.

But that doesn’t mean all 161,000 people settled in Florida. DHS tracks the first airport people reached in the U.S. This is where U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers screen people for admission. After that, people can settle elsewhere within the U.S.

It’s unclear how many parole beneficiaries settled in Florida. However, the parole program benefits people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, all countries that have large immigrant populations in Florida.

Our ruling

Scott said, “Joe Biden flew hundreds of thousands of illegals into Florida last year.”

A Biden humanitarian parole program lets 30,000 eligible immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela a month enter the U.S. They can live and work in the U.S. legally for two years. The Biden administration does not cover travel costs; beneficiaries must book and fund their own travel.

More than 161,000 program beneficiaries entered the U.S. at a Florida airport. However, it’s unclear how many of those people settled in Florida. 

We rate Scott’s claim False.

A recent Facebook post warns of “permanent tyranny,” pointing to a new directive from President Joe Biden, Executive Order 14122.

“Tyrant can suspend presidential elections ‘IF’ a new pandemic hits the U.S.!” the April 26 post says, sharing a screenshot of a blog post from the same date that says, in part, “Biden issues Executive Order 14122.” But the blog post doesn’t suggest the executive order enables Biden to suspend elections. 

This Facebook post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

Executive Order 14122, issued April 12, does not empower Biden to suspend presidential elections. 

Rather, the order revokes several executive orders Biden’s administration deemed “no longer necessary” and transfers “certain roles and responsibilities” established by other executive orders to the Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which Congress established following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Among the executive orders that Biden revoked: one “preventing the hoarding of health and medical resources to respond to the spread of COVID-19” and another “requiring mask-wearing.” 

The order doesn’t mention suspending presidential elections. In fact, it doesn’t mention elections at all. 

U.S. law sets federal elections on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November during even-numbered years. As the Congressional Research Service notes, changing the date would require enacting a new law because “neither the Constitution nor Congress provides any … power to the President or other federal officials to change this date outside of Congress’s regular legislative process.” 

We rate this post False.