U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that “our ultimate goal” is to give citizenship to migrants who already crossed a border into the U.S.
Rating:
Context
Schumer truly said this days following the November 2022 midterm elections, specifically during a news conference about protecting Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals legislation. This week, social media users sharing his remark as a quote or video failed to mention that he said it almost four years ago. For example, one popular user misleadingly posted the matter as “BREAKING” and that Schumer “just” said it.
Less than a month away from the midterm elections on Nov. 3, people shared a rumor claiming U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that “our ultimate goal” is to give citizenship to millions of migrants who already crossed a border into the U.S.
For example, on Tuesday, a popular X user posted (archived), “Sen. Chuck Schumer: ‘Our ultimate goal’ is to give every illegal alien citizenship.”
(@LeadingReport via X)
On the same day, another popular user on Facebook posted (archived) a photo of Schumer with the word “BREAKING!” and police car light emojis, with a text caption reading, “BREAKING: Sen. Chuck Schumer just that ‘Our ultimate goal’ is to give every illegal alien citizenship. We knew this was their strategy and why they wanted open borders! Remember this when you vote!”
The videos show Schumer talking behind microphones outside the Capitol in Washington, surrounded by people who at one point cheer him on. He speaks about protecting “Dreamers,” a reference to Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals — a federal immigration policy allowing some immigrants who came to the U.S. as children to receive temporary protection from deportation and eligibility for a renewable work permit:
Now more than ever, we’re short of workers. We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to. The only way we’re going to have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants, the “Dreamers” and all of them, because our ultimate goal is to help the “Dreamers” but get a path to citizenship for all 11 million or however many undocumented there are here.
In sum, Schumer truly said this. He made the remark in November 2022 as part of an effort to urge the Senate to pass protections for “Dreamers” during a lame-duck session of Congress, prior to the start of a fresh session in the new year. Users omitted that month and year from their posts.
Snopes emailed Schumer’s office to ask if he still believed in what he said in the video, if he meant Democrats or “Dreamers” were the ones who had the “ultimate goal” he described and if he wished to share a statement responding to users reposting his comment. We will update this article if we receive further information.
More of Schumer’s remarks
Schumer spoke about “our ultimate goal” and “Dreamers” on Nov. 16, 2022. He began his thoughts as follows (bolded emphasis ours, notes section from users’ posts):
I believe in this so much. I believe in it in a personal basis because I know “Dreamers” who have been such great people here in America and who have just struggled every time they get a phone call, every time they walk down the street, they’re worried, will someone grab them and take them away. So that’s personal about them and what they have done. But I also believe in it as an overall, as an American who wants to see our country be stronger because immigrants make us stronger now more than ever.
Now more than ever, now more than ever, we’re short of workers. We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to. The only way we’re gonna have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants, the “Dreamers” and all of them because our ultimate goal is to help the “Dreamers” but get a path to citizenship for all 11 million or however many undocumented there are here, and we will be pursuing that in the next Senate, in the next Senate, the comprehensive immigration reform. Right now, our focus is on “Dreamers” and we retain the Senate.
Schumer later closed his comments, saying, “We will not stop fighting till we get a fix for DACA, a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and a pathway to citizenship for all undocumented.” More of the event is available to watch on C-SPAN and YouTube.
For further reading, we previously reported the untrue claim that Schumer had said in 1996, “The No. 1 reason people come to the U.S. illegally is to defraud systems like Social Security and I want to stop it.”
Sources
Figueroa, Ariana. “U.S. Senate Democrats Make a Last-Ditch Push for a Pathway to Citizenship for Dreamers.” New Jersey Monitor, 16 Nov. 2022, https://newjerseymonitor.com/2022/11/16/u-s-senate-democrats-make-a-last-ditch-push-for-a-pathway-to-citizenship-for-dreamers/.
Lozano, Juan A. “Judge Rules New DACA Program Can Continue Temporarily.” The Associated Press, 14 Oct. 2022, https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-united-states-immigration-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-program-congress-6108ffa1d6e77c65e88438cdc1d6552e.
Montoya-Galvez, Camilo. “Last-Minute Push to Pass Bipartisan Immigration Deal Fails, Dooming yet Another Reform Effort.” CBS News, 15 Dec. 2022, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/immigration-sinema-tillis-bipartisan-deal-congress-reform/.
MS NOW has partnered with FiftyPlusOne for polling data, approval ratings, election modeling and analysis in advance of the midterms.
The deal starts on Thursday, and MS NOW will be FiftyPlusOne’s exclusive national partner.
G. Elliott Morris, head of analytics at FiftyPlusOne, previously was editorial director of data analytics at ABC News, including oversight of FiveThirtyEight. FiftyPlusOne’s data will be used across MS NOW’s platforms and Morris will write a regular column for ms.now. The MS NOW Membership will feature FiftyPlusOne data in its Live Q&A feature. MS NOW earlier announced a partnership with the Associated Press for election results.
FiftyPlusOne features daily polling averages on upcoming elections and issues and forecasts on various contests.
Kabir Khanna, director of elections and analytics at MS NOW, said in a statement that FiftyPlusOne’s “expertise will give out journalists and audiences a deeper understanding of the polling landscape before and after Election Day.” Morris said that FiftyPlusOne provides “rigorous, transparent aggregation of public opinion polls and other electoral data that’s honest about what the numbers can and can’t tell us.”
A federal judge said he will rule by Tuesday on Donald Trump‘s ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico from White House grounds, while he pressed the government’s lawyers on the different justifications offered by the president and the DOJ.
U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, appointed to the bench by Trump in his first term, also extended a temporary restraining order through Tuesday, which restricts the White House from pulling the hard passes of nearly 80 journalists and other staffers from the three outlets.
Thursday’s hearing was over whether to grant a preliminary injunction, something that would block Trump’s ban for a longer term — at least until a trial or an appeal. The judge issued a two-week TRO on Sept. 24, six days after the president announced the ban. That forced the White House to return the press credentials to the reporters and allow them back on the grounds.
Theodore Boutrous Jr., representing the three outlets, told the judge that since then, the case “has gotten stronger for the plaintiffs thanks to Donald Trump.”
Boutrous pointed to an interview that Trump gave to Time, published on Sept. 28, in which he complained about the media publishing “bad story after bad story,” and never mentioned the government’s defense of the ban, centered on the outlets’ publication of national security information.
“That is pretextual, it is post hoc,” Boutrous told the judge.
In the courtroom, Boutrous and four other attorneys sat at the plaintiffs’ table, while there was just one attorney on the defense side, representing the White House. That was Michael Velchik, senior counsel in the DOJ’s civil division. Also present in the gallery were editors and reporters from the outlets, including CNN’s David Chalian and Jonathan Greenberger, Politico’s global editor in chief.
Velchik told the judge that the ban is justified because the outlets had engaged in “indefensible conduct.” He pointed to what he characterized as false quotes and anonymous sourcing, while holding that access to the White House grounds is a “privilege” under the president’s discretion. When it came to national security, he said, “If CNN published nuclear codes, the government is not helpless.”
Kelly, though, pressed Velchik on the different explanations offered by Trump and the DOJ, where “the decision maker seems to have said, ‘We are taking action because of X, Y,’ and the government is saying, ‘No, it’s Z.’”
“It just seems like the fact pattern is hard to find,” the judge said.
Velchik said that the government never said that the ban was solely about national security, citing another justification that the outlets failed to meet minimal journalistic standards of professionalism. Those two justifications, Velchik said, also overlap.
The DOJ attorney also argued that the three outlets forfeited their right to appeal the ban, because letters were sent out on Sept. 22, informing them of specific stories at issue, but they never filed an objection to the White House by a deadline at the end of that week.
Boutrous, though, noted that the letters were sent off days after the ban was already implemented and the media outlets filed suit. The letters were unsigned and merely started they came from the White House Press Office, he noted. He described it as a “sham process,” arguing that it was clear that by the time the letters went out, “The president already made up his mind.”
At one point, Boutrous suggested that the president likely “woke up on the wrong side of the bed” and then decided to issue the ban. He said that the White House was citing “amorphous” professional standards, warning of what would happen if reporters were blocked from the grounds because the president deems a story wrong.
“If a press pass is at risk because Donald Trump decides something is false, that is a very chilling” standard, Boutrous said.
The judge did seem receptive to the DOJ’s point that there is a government interest in protecting national security, but he made clear that he is bound by past D.C. Circuit precedent, including cases that favored journalistic access to the White House over attempts to restrict certain correspondents. In a case brought by Playboy correspondent Brian Karem, the D.C. Circuit ruled that the White House cannot rely on “unarticulated standards of professionalism” to justify the suspension of hard passes.
Like Kelly’s TRO, the Karem ruling centered on Fifth Amendment due process, but Boutrous urged the judge to also address their claims that the media outlets’ First Amendment rights were violated.
In the meantime, the White House has restricted CNN and Politico from access to various presidential events, including travel on Air Force One as the designated pool outlet. The three outlets have pointed to the continued restrictions as further evidence of viewpoint retaliation, but the legal question of whether blocking access to smaller spaces like the Oval Office and on presidential travel is the subject of a separate legal proceeding involving the Associated Press.
A video posted in October authentically depicts a man leading a group of Arkansas farmers in praying for “more Mexicans” to keep farms running.
Rating:
Context
The visuals in the footage have an authentic origin, but the audio has been edited to significantly change the meaning of the prayer.
On Oct. 4, a social media user posted a video purportedly depicting a man leading a group of Arkansas farmers in prayer, asking “baby Jesus” for “more Mexicans” to replace the “Mexicans we had deported” to save their farms.
The user posted the footage to Facebook (archived) and Instagram (archived). The audio seemingly shows the man leading the prayer saying:
Dear Baby Jesus, please help us. We’re losing our farms. We know we sent all the Mexicans away. Dear Lord, please send us some more Mexicans to replace the Mexicans we had deported. We’re going to lose our farms; please, Baby Jesus and all things holy. Amen.
In short, the visuals in the video have an authentic origin, but the audio has been edited to significantly change the meaning of the prayer. Therefore, we rate the audio as fake.
The authentic footage originates from a broadcast by KATV 7, a TV news station in Little Rock, Arkansas. The channel posted the segment to YouTube on Sept. 2, 2025 (archived), more than a year earlier than when the edited clip was circulating. It shows hundreds of Arkansas farmers in a school gymnasium seeking the federal government’s help regarding their financial struggles.
At about 2:24, the video cuts to a man leading the farmers in prayer. He can be heard saying:
Farmers, in my opinion, dear Lord, and it’s only my opinion, are closer to you than anyone else on this Earth because we deal with your Earth every day. Dear Lord, we’re hurting, dear Lord. We can’t help what’s happened to us.
According to KATV 7’s article about the event, also published on Sept. 2, 2025, the farmer then said, “We need help, dear Lord.”
Another piece of evidence that the “more Mexicans” iteration of the clip is edited is the quality of its audio. The prayer in the edited version is sharp, clear and lacking an echo. Inside a school gymnasium, the audio of the farmers praying should, in reality, feature an echo, like the man’s voice does in the original footage.
Both Facebook and Instagram identified the audio as original to Aaron Beltrán, the person who appeared to first post the edited clip on both platforms.
Snopes reached out to Beltrán to ask whether he originally edited and posted the manipulated video, if the voice is his own and if the content was meant to be satirical. We will update this story if we receive a reply.
For further reading, we addressed a claim that U.S. President Donald Trump said Iran “can take out” Los Angeles and San Diego.
Early voting in the U.S. midterm elections is underway. Voters are deciding which party will control Congress, as well as numerous state legislatures and governors’ offices. Snopes’ fact-checkers are flagging rumors surrounding the election, debunking false statements by candidates and suspicious voter fraud claims with nonpartisan research and expert sources. Join our effort to keep this election fact-focused by becoming a Snopes member.
A persistent theory about “ballot drops,” meaning when a large number of votes suddenly changes the outcome of an election, has circulated online since at least 2020, when U.S. President Donald Trump appeared to blame late spikes in votes for Democrats for losses in states where Republicans had been leading.
Though Trump and other public figures have tried to frame “ballot drops” or vote spikes as election fraud, there are usually specific and legitimate reasons behind them.
According to the Election Integrity Partnership, vote spikes can happen for a number of legitimate reasons. These include: large areas that vote heavily Democratic or Republican reporting at once, delays in counting in high-population areas that vote heavily for one party, longer processing times for mail-in ballots or clerical errors.
Though it can appear that a lot of votes suddenly “enter” a count when a vote spike happens, it’s important to remember that those votes have been processed and counted by elections officials to verify they came from real, registered voters.
A large batch of votes being submitted to a count all at once reflects normal election procedures and is not in itself a sign of fraud, even if those votes lean heavily Democrat or Republican.
As the 2026 midterm elections near, misinformation from election cycles past lies poised to reappear online.
For example, Snopes has previouslyreported on so-called “ballot drops,” which is when a large number of votes suddenly changes the outcome of an election.
Though “ballot drops” generally have specific and legitimate explanations that we will cover below, prominent figures such as U.S. President Donald Trump have attempted to frame them as examples of election fraud.
During the vote count for the 2020 presidential election that former President Joe Biden won, Trump suggested (archived) on X that “ballot dumps” lost him several states where Republicans had been leading:
Last night I was leading, often solidly, in many key States, in almost all instances Democrat run & controlled. Then, one by one, they started to magically disappear as surprise ballot dumps were counted. VERY STRANGE, and the “pollsters” got it completely & historically wrong!
Two years later, after the 2022 midterm elections, PolitiFact reported that the businessman Mike Lindell, then a highly visible Trump supporter, spread a number of graphs he claimed showed election fraud in the form of “ballot drops” that helped Democrats overtake Republicans in a number of races.
Despite the persistence of the “ballot drop” election fraud theory, sudden spikes in votes during ongoing counts usually have specific, legitimate explanations. Though it can appear that a lot of votes suddenly “enter” a count when a vote spike happens, it’s important to remember that those votes have been processed and counted by elections officials to verify they came from real, registered voters.
The fact that a batch of votes is submitted to a count all at once reflects normal election procedures and is not in itself a sign of fraud, even if those votes lean heavily toward one party or the other.
Why do vote spikes happen?
In the 2020 presidential election and the 2022 midterm elections, clerical errors caused some vote spikes that officials later corrected. Other spikes were the result of election officials in an area that leaned heavily Democratic or Republican registering a large batch of counted votes all at once.
The timing of vote spikes sometimes has to do with what types of ballots are in a given batch. For example, according to a report by the MIT Election Data + Science Lab (Page 10), Democratic voters were historically more likely than Republican voters to use mail-in ballots, meaning vote spikes that benefit Democratic candidates can happen when election officials start to count and report those ballots.
The Election Integrity Partnership, a nonpartisan coalition that reported on topics it found “demonstrably harmful to the democratic process” during the 2020 and 2022 elections, wrote about “ballot drops” in 2022 after Lindell shared graphs he claimed showed the alleged fraud in action.
The group wrote that vote spikes were “commonplace” but that people often misinterpreted graphs showing the spikes. It gave four main reasons for vote spikes:
Vote counts are reported in batches and varying intervals.
There can be delays in counting and tabulating in-person votes.
Some states legally allow absentee and mail-in ballots to be counted prior to polls being closed, and thus those vote counts may be reported en masse.
Voting “spikes” can also be caused due to clerical errors and are not limited to any particular political party or individual.
This article will discuss these four reasons in turn.
The law and policy institute the Brennan Center for Justice and the legal organization Campaign Legal Center also wrote about the spread of the “ballot drop” theory after the 2020 presidential election. Both organizations pointed to similar legitimate explanations for vote spikes during a count.
Batch reports and count delays
Snopes previously investigated one instance where officials reporting a large batch of counted votes created a “vote spike” that favored a Democratic candidate. On Nov. 18, 2020, we reported that the claim (archived), also shared by Trump, that Biden received a fraudulent “ballot dump” to eventually win Wisconsin was false.
Rather than a fraudulent “ballot dump,” local media reported that Biden took the lead in Wisconsin when Milwaukee, the most-populous city in the state, reported its “overwhelmingly Democratic” 170,000 absentee votes around 3:30 a.m. Nov. 4.
Wisconsin is one of a few states in the U.S. where, by law, elections officials cannot begin to process mail-in ballots before Election Day, meaning they must verify and count mail-in ballots after polls open. Because counting mail-in ballots requires more verification than ballots filled out in person, this process can take longer, meaning those votes may be reported later in the count.
PolitiFact reported that a vote spike (archived) that appeared to favor Georgia’s Democratic candidate for Senate, Raphael Warnock, in the 2022 general election actually reflected Fulton County, which includes Atlanta, reporting a large batch of votes that skewed Democrat.
Robert Sinners, a spokesperson for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, reportedly told PolitiFact, “In Georgia, we call a 9 p.m. upload toward one candidate ‘the Atlanta metro has reported.’” Sinners’ statement suggested that if votes from the Atlanta metro area created a vote spike, that was merely due to the city’s large population.
Elections officials in Georgia can process but cannot count any votes before polls close, meaning counts from races in the state can take longer to complete.
PolitiFact reported in 2022 that some — mainly Democrat-voting — cities lagged behind their states in how quickly they finished their counts meaning that in some places, large batches of “blue” (Democratic) votes came in comparably late in the count, which could also cause a legitimate vote spike.
The outlet wrote:
Because large cities are almost uniformly Democratic these days and small-population rural counties are almost always Republican, it’s easy to cast blame for slow counting on partisan factors. But the reality is that a lot depends on simple math.
Along the same lines, as examples from Wisconsin and Georgia show, vote spikes can often be attributed to demographics and math rather than conspiracy.
Mail-in ballots
As seen in Snopes’ report on the election results in Wisconsin in 2020, large batches of mail-in votes can change an election result late in the count. However, the Election Integrity Partnership wrote that mail-in ballots can also appear to give candidates a head start.
For example, 33 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico allow elections officials to scan, meaning count, mail-in ballots before Election Day, though the results cannot be released before polls close. States that may have already counted some mail-in ballots will be able to release some results very quickly after the close of polls.
In states that allow early scanning of mail-in ballots, early election-night results could skew Democratic because these voters are more likely to have used mail-in voting. Though this might look like a vote spike, the difference between the candidates will likely narrow as counts come in from areas with more in-person or Republican voters. In this scenario, no candidate is “finding” or “losing” votes. Rather, the early results reflect how an individual state has decided to count its votes.
Clerical errors
If vote spikes aren’t caused by the ballots themselves, they also can be caused by human error.
For example, in the 2020 presidential election, a county clerk in Shiawassee County, Michigan, accidentally added a zero to Biden’s vote tally, reporting 153,710 votes for the Democrat instead of 15,371.
The clerk in question, Caroline Wilson, reportedly told Agence France-Presse that officials corrected the mistake shortly after, suggesting that existing systems to catch such incidents were working. Trump went on to win the county after officials corrected the vote tally.
Likewise, in 2022, Rob Farbman, the executive vice president of Edison Research, which provides polling data to media outlets, reportedly told AFP a roughly million-vote spike for incumbent Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois happened because someone at Edison Research “added a 9 at the beginning of Duckworth’s number in Rock Island.”
The mistake happened after the race had been called for Duckworth, the AFP reported, and Edison Research fixed the mistake shortly after it occurred.
Neither of these mistakes materially affected the result of the races, and both suggested that elections officials and companies such as Edison have systems in place that work to catch and correct vote-tally errors introduced by humans.
The bottom line
If readers encounter “ballot drop” theories as votes roll in during these midterm elections, they should stop and consider whether any of the above reasons might provide a specific, legitimate explanation for an apparent vote spike.
It is also worth remembering that the results reported on election night are never the final, certified results. In most races, media outlets are able to mathematically eliminate one candidate using the information from the counts provided and “call” the race. These media estimates are not, however, final results.
Rather, elections officials will canvass and audit the counts from election night before certifying the result. This process allows officials another chance to review vote spikes and ensure that they happen for legitimate reasons.
Sources
BAUDOIN-LAARMAN, Louis. ‘Human Error in Michigan County Vote Tally Sparks Claims of Election Fraud’. AFP, 4 Nov. 2020, https://factcheck.afp.com/human-error-michigan-county-vote-tally-sparks-claims-election-fraud.
BRUMBACK, KATE. ‘Here We Go Again: What to Expect as Georgia Counts Votes’. Associated Press, 4 Jan. 2021, https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-johnny-isakson-georgia-general-elections-elections-eea3b662d4470c6f02ffd500d8aaaff8#:~:text=No%20ballots%2C%20including,to%20be%20processed.
Cercone, Jeff. Graphs Showing Vote Spikes Don’t Mean Elections Are Stolen. 11 Nov. 2022, https://politifact.com/article/2022/nov/11/why-vote-spikes-graphs-shared-mike-lindell-are-not/.
‘Common Questions and Answers About the 2020 Election Results’. Campaign Legal Center, https://campaignlegal.org/common-questions-and-answers-about-2020-election-results#:~:text=Was%20the%20Fact%20that%20Biden%20Overtook%20Trump%20in%20Key%20States%20in%20the%20Days%20following%20the%20Election%20the%20Result%20of%20a%C2%A0Nefarious%20Plot%3F%20Or%20When%20States%20Counted%20Ballots%3F.
Edlin, Ruby. ‘Five False Election Rumors to Watch For | Brennan Center for Justice’. Brennan Center For Justice, 5 Oct. 2026, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/five-false-election-rumors-watch.
Election Results, Canvass, and Certification | U.S. Election Assistance Commission. https://www.eac.gov/election-officials/election-results-canvass-and-certification#Certification:~:text=The%20election%20results%20reported%20on%20election%20night%20are%20never%20the%20final%2C%20certified%20results. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
‘How Real-Time Visualizations of Vote Count “Spikes” Can Lead to Unfounded Allegations of Election Fraud’. Election Integrity Partnership, https://www.eipartnership.net/blog/potentially-misleading-data-visualizations-lindell. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Marley, Craig Gilbert and Patrick. ‘Biden Declared Winner in Wisconsin with 20,000 Vote Margin; Trump Campaign Vows Request for Recount’. Journal Sentinel, https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/04/wisconsin-results-down-wire-again-milwaukee-ballot-count/6123344002/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Sherman, Amy, and Louis Jacobson. Ted Cruz’s Misleading Claim on Election Night Counts. 28 Oct. 2022, https://politifact.com/factchecks/2022/oct/28/ted-cruz/ted-cruzs-misleading-claim-that-only-democratic-ci/.
Stewart III, Charles. ‘HOW WE VOTED IN 2024 ‘. MIT Election Data and Science Lab, https://electionlab.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2025-07/HowWeVotedIn2024.pdf.
‘Table 16: When Absentee/Mail Ballot Processing and Counting Can Begin’. National Conference of State Legislatures, 15 Sept. 2026, https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/table-16-when-absentee-mail-ballot-processing-and-counting-can-begin#toggleContent-12088.
Retired professional U.S. soccer star Megan Rapinoe called for Super Bowl champion and ESPN analyst Jason Kelce’s firing after he said the Washington Commanders’ former team name on TV.
Rating:
A claim that retired professional U.S. soccer star Megan Rapinoe called for Super Bowl champion and ESPN analyst Jason Kelce’s firing began circulating online this week.
Snopes readers searched for references to Rapinoe and Kelce on this website, which led us to consult search engines DuckDuckGo and Google for basic details about why the two names were making the rounds together. We located a popular Facebook post (archived) that appeared on the Empire Sports Facebook page on Oct. 5, reading in part:
MEGAN RAPINOE: Calls for Jason Kelce to be FIRED..
Megan Rapinoe criticized Jason Kelce after he used Washington’s former team name during a live broadcast.
“I know Jason Kelce said that racist name on purpose to create division. He should be fired immediately.”
— Megan Rapinoe
The comments under Empire Sports’ post indicated some people believed Rapinoe truly called for Kelce’s firing.
Other users shared the rumor on Facebook (archived) and Threads (archived), though the original Empire Sports Facebook post earned far more likes, comments and shares than other examples.
In sum, while it’s true Kelce mentioned the old Washington Redskins’ team name during a TV broadcast, Rapinoe did not call for his firing.
The Empire Sports page displays a disclaimer acknowledging it publishes fabricated content of a parodical and satirical nature, reading, “Delivering the Finest of Sports Parodies / Satire / Updates / Insider News & much MORE.” In other words, Empire Sports does not publish authentic news reports.
The aforementioned searches of DuckDuckGo and Google located no news media outlets credibly reporting Rapinoe said any such things about Kelce. Rapinoe’s active Instagram page also did not feature any content about him.
Snopes emailed representatives for Rapinoe and Kelce to ask if either wished to address the popular made-up story. The Empire Sports page didn’t display a Messenger button or any other contact methods.
Purveyors of misinformation and fabricated stories — whether labeled as parody and satire or not — have long wielded Rapinoe’s name and image as politically-fueled engagement bait, whether for social media posts or website traffic, sometimes thinly disguised as satire. Part of the reason for the firestorm of controversy in this instance stems from U.S. President Donald Trump’s comments about Rapinoe, and vice versa.
What Kelce said
On Oct. 4, Kelce served as an analyst during the ESPN-owned NFL Network TV broadcast of the Indianapolis Colts’ 30-13 victory over the Washington Commanders, which took place in London.
A video from that broadcast shows Kelce apologizing to the Washington Commanders after he used the team’s former name. In the clip, Kelce breaks down the Commanders’ defensive coverage, saying, “The Redskins right now are doing a great job of not only staying tight but making the play when the ball is in the receiver’s hand and keeping it short of the sticks.”
Announcer Dave Pasch laughs, telling Kelce he accidentally said Redskins, to which Kelce responds, “Oh my gosh! I almost made it out.” Pasch then says he, Kelce and former Super Bowl MVP Kurt Warner, also working as an analyst, all had a “gentleman’s bet” regarding who would slip up first. Kelce replies, “Well, sorry Washington.”
@awfulannouncing. “Jason Kelce Slips up When Referring to the Washington Commanders.” X, 4 Oct. 2026, https://x.com/awfulannouncing/status/2106779876548288747.
ESPN News Services. “Regulators OK ESPN’s Deal for NFL Network, RedZone Rights from NFL.” ESPN, 31 Jan. 2026, https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/47793895/regulators-ok-espn-purchase-nfl-network-redzone-rights-nfl-equity-stake.
“Kurt Warner.” Pro Football Hall of Fame, https://www.profootballhof.com/players/kurt-warner.
Mangan, Dan. “Trump Says World Cup Soccer Star Megan Rapinoe ‘should Never Disrespect Our Country’ after She Scoffs at Idea of White House Visit.” CNBC, 26 June 2019, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/26/trump-criticizes-world-cup-star-megan-rapinoe.html.
O’Kane, Caitlin. “Megan Rapinoe Says She’s Never Going to the White House — Unless She’s Inaugurated.” CBS News, 29 July 2019, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/megan-rapinoe-says-shes-never-going-to-the-white-house-unless-shes-inaugurated/.
“Tea Time as Jonathan Taylor Runs for 2 TDs and Colts Beat Commanders 30-13 in London.” ESPN, The Associated Press, 4 Oct. 2026, https://www.espn.com/nfl/recap/_/gameId/401872965.
“U.S. Women’s National Team Legend Megan Rapinoe Announces Retirement From Professional Soccer At End Of 2023 NWSL Season | U.S. Soccer Official Website.” U.S. Soccer, 8 July 2023, https://ussoccer.com/stories/2023/07/us-womens-national-team-legend-megan-rapinoe-will-retire-at-end-of-2023-nwsl-season.
Brett McGurk‘s new book Brink: Inside the Race to Free the October 7th Hostages offers an insider account of the diplomatic rollercoaster to secure a ceasefire and hostage release in the war in Gaza.
The book, published this week, also offers a glimpse at White House messaging about the conflict, including two figures the president turned to in delivering a key speech: Jeffrey Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg.
McGurk, who served as deputy assistant for national security affairs to Biden, wrote of the scene as they prepared the president for his address on May 31, 2024. While Katzenberg and Spielberg’s role have been reported before, McGurk gave a first-hand account in the room, for a speech focused on a proposal to end the fighting and to secure a release of the hostages.
By that point, the Gaza conflict had created divisions within the Democratic coalition, protests at college campuses and presidential appearances and concerns over its impact on the November elections. There was pressure from the campaign for the president to make an address on the crisis, per McGurk.
McGurk wrote of the rehearsal, “In the Map Room, Biden peered at two screens behind me. ‘Jeffrey, Steven, welcome,’ he said. I turned around to see Jeffery Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg on Zoom. They greeted Biden warmly, Spielberg saying this was the speech they wanted to hear.
“It was a reminder that while I saw this speech as a policy address with a functional aim, it had a political purpose, too,” McGurk wrote.
He added, “The speech was timed for Friday night in Israel, when much of the country shuts down, allowing time for us to shape its reception there and around the world. Notably, we did not inform Netanyahu that we were making the speech until shortly before Biden delivered it, as we knew the address would lock Netanyahu into the terms of the deal now on the table.
“Biden said he was ready.
“Katzenberg advised, ‘Remember, slow Joe, let the audience hear every word.’
“Biden smiled, ‘Slow Joe? Don’t let Jill hear that.’
“He read through the draft, pausing at times to ask questions about the text, which we addressed with rewrites.”
McGurk wrote that he found Biden “fully engaged, leaning forward on the podium.”
He wrote, “The moguls told him he looked strong, and he did. There was no sign of the Biden we’d all see on a debate stage with Trump only four weeks later.”
The latter was a reference to Biden’s disastrous debate performance against Trump. What followed were weeks of calls on Biden to drop out, coming from some elected Democrats and prominent donors, until he exited the race on July 19. Katzenberg had played a prominent role as a top adviser to Biden’s re-election campaign.
While the Biden speech focused on a peace proposal, as it turned out, it would take until the next year, a week before Trump returned to office, for a ceasefire agreement to be reached.
The claim that an image of U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth standing in front of an eagle emblem with his arms raised closely resembles a real image of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler is unfounded.
The image of Hitler has strong indications of artificial intelligence generation. The image of Hegseth also has signs pointing to AI editing, although real video footage from an Oct. 3 speech authentically shows that the changes were minor and that Hegseth did raise his arms in front of a stylized version of the Department of Defense’s eagle seal.
The eagle emblem in the image of Hitler matches the “Reichsadler” symbol Hitler’s Nazi regime used — but it’s worth noting that the emblem was a highly stylized version of an eagle symbol used in Germany both before and after the Nazi Party came to power. The DOD has since 1949 used a seal featuring an eagle holding arrows above an olive branch; the version on display during Hegseth’s Oct. 3 speech omitted the olive branch and had a more stylized design.
We’ve reached out to the DOD to ask about the reason for the redesign and whether any similarities to the Reichsadler were intentional. The DOD denied any similarities existed.
On Oct. 3, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth delivered a speech at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Images from the speech of Hegseth with his arms spread wide in front of the Department of Defense’s eagle seal went viral, drawing comparisons to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and an official Nazi symbol.
Snopes readers shared the images with us, asking to confirm whether such comparisons were accurate. One Facebook meme showed Hegseth in front of a simplified version of the DOD’s eagle seal without its traditional olive branch. Next to him, in a similar pose with his arms outstretched is Hitler in front of the “Reichsadler,” the eagle emblem of Nazi Germany. The accompanying caption stated:
On Saturday, Hegseth traveled to the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs to address the cadets.
As he walked on stage, the Department of War seal was visible behind him and on the podium in front of him.
Before he began, he raised both arms out to the side and told the cadets to take their seats.
That was all it took.
Within hours, critics were posting side-by-side images comparing the staging of the speech to old photos of Adolf Hitler speaking in front of an eagle emblem.
(Facebook user “Really American”)
The image of Hegseth showed signs of artificial intelligence editing in the form of garbled letters in the seals behind and in front of him, but video footage of the Oct. 3 speech shows that the content was not meaningfully altered. The accompanying image of Hitler, however, carries signs of heavy manipulation and was likely entirely generated by AI.
That said, there are still other authentic photographs of Hitler that show him standing in front of a Nazi eagle emblem that in some ways resembles the new DOD one.
Given the heavy manipulation of the Hitler image, we found the claim that the image of Hegseth closely resembled a real image of Hitler unfounded.
We reached out to the DOD to ask about the reason for the redesign and whether any resemblance to the Reichsadler was intentional. Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Joel Valdez said to us over email: “The American bald eagle is an icon of our country and used on many state and federal seals, including the seal of the Department of War. If for some reason you see imagery of a bald eagle and begin having delusions about Nazi Germany, then you may need to get your head checked for serious brain damage.”
The moment where Hegseth raised his arms wide occurred in the very beginning of his speech at the 5-second mark on the official DOD YouTube video. We captured a screenshot below:
(YouTube user “Department of War”)
The image of Hegseth in the Facebook post appears to have been edited or manipulated. The color is much brighter and the “M” behind Hegseth’s right arm appears misshapen. Hegseth’s face also appears different. The image itself is similar to its original YouTube video.
There are several indications of AI generation in the purported photograph of Hitler. Firstly, the individuals on either side of him on the bottom left and right of the frame all have incomplete facial features, with sections of their heads cut off or blurred. The flags behind him also have inconsistent patterns that show signs of heavy editing or cropping.
Real photographs of Hitler standing in front of flag poles show that, even on draped flags, the swastikas are recognizable. The two swastikas on either side of Hitler’s head are almost perfectly round circles. Considering they are placed over what could either be rounded pillars or curtains, they are clearly overlaid or heavily edited.
We compared the image to realphotographs of speeches Hitler made, and found none that resemble the room in the image from the meme. One authentic 1939 image on Getty Images shows Hitler speaking to the Reichstag, or German parliament, with a much larger eagle symbol and the Nazi symbols farther apart. Images of Hitler speaking at Nuremberg rallies do not align with the one in the above meme. Videos show that Hitler often spoke with his arms held wide, but there are no specific videos corresponding with the image in the above meme.
Despite the above image of Hitler being heavily manipulated, Hegseth’s backdrop still has loose similarities to other realphotographs of Hitler speaking in front of an eagle emblem.
During Hegseth’s speech, many online noted the simplified (archived) version of the DOD seal, which removed the traditional olive leaves below the eagle, made the eagle’s design more angular and replaced the 13 stars above the eagle with five stars.
We should note that the eagle symbol was used in Germany before and after the Nazi Party came to power. The DOD has been using the eagle seal since 1949. The DOD website, which still showed the version of the seal containing the olive branch as of this writing, explains its meaning thus: “The American bald eagle, long associated with symbolism representing the United States of America and its military establishment, has been selected as an emblem of strength. In facing to the right, the field of honor is indicated.”
Hegseth has also been in the news for his Sept. 30 “State of the Force” address, in which he announced he was creating an Office of Religious Affairs at the Pentagon and initiating “Project Meridian,” which he described as “an effort led by America’s best minds to study the future of warfare.”
“29th March 1938, German Chancellor and Nazi Dictator Adolf Hitler Is…” Getty Images, 8 Feb. 2008, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/29th-march-1938-german-chancellor-and-nazi-dictator-adolf-news-photo/79665902. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
“April 28, 1939; Hitler Makes an Address to the Reichstag, Answering…” Getty Images, 23 July 2015, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/april-28-1939-hitler-makes-an-address-to-the-reichstag-news-photo/566456303. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Barton, Laura. “Is the Eagle a Nazi Symbol?” The Guardian, 20 June 2007. Money. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/jun/20/business.secondworldwar. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
“Brand Guide.” Department of War, https://www.war.gov/Brand-Guide/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Cartwright, Mark. “Nuremberg Rally.” World History Encyclopedia, Oct. 2024. www.worldhistory.org, https://www.worldhistory.org/Nuremberg_Rally/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Deng, Rae. “12 Rumors about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.” Snopes, 30 Apr. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//collections/pete-hegseth-rumors-collection/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
“Hegseth Speaks to Cadets Ahead of Air Force, Navy Football Game.” Department of War, 3 Oct. 2026, https://www.war.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/4618565/hegseth-speaks-to-cadets-ahead-of-air-force-navy-football-game/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
“Hitler, Adolf – Politician, NSDAP, Germany *20.04.1889-+ Hitler After…” Getty Images, 16 Apr. 2015, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/hitler-adolf-politician-nsdap-germany-20-04-1889-hitler-news-photo/548866885. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Izzo, Jack. “21 Claims We’ve Investigated about Hegseth’s Department of Defense.” Snopes, 4 Apr. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//collections/hegseth-department-of-defense-rumors/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
“Le Chancelier Adolf Hitler Prononçant Un Discours à Karlsruhe,…” Getty Images, 30 Apr. 2018, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/le-chancelier-adolf-hitler-pronon%C3%A7ant-un-discours-%C3%A0-news-photo/953408810. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Rascouët-Paz, Anna. “Hegseth Named Musk, Gingrich to Lead ‘Project Meridian.’ Here’s What We Know about the Plan.” Snopes, 1 Oct. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//news/2026/10/01/hegseth-musk-gingrich-project-meridian/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Rascouët-Paz, Anna. “Pentagon’s New Office of Religious Affairs under Hegseth: What We Know.” Snopes, 2 Oct. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//news/2026/10/02/hegseth-religious-affairs-office/. Accessed 6 Oct. 2026.
Brett McGurk‘s new book Brink: Inside the Race to Free the October 7th Hostages offers an insider account of the diplomatic rollercoaster to secure a ceasefire and hostage release in the war in Gaza.
The book, published this week, also offers a glimpse at White House messaging about the conflict, including two figures the president turned to in delivering a key speech: Jeffrey Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg.
McGurk, who served as deputy assistant for national security affairs to Biden, wrote of the scene as they prepared the president for his address on May 31, 2024. While Katzenberg and Spielberg’s role have been reported before, McGurk gave a first-hand account in the room, for a speech focused on a proposal to end the fighting and to secure a release of the hostages.
By that point, the Gaza conflict had created divisions within the Democratic coalition, protests at college campuses and presidential appearances and concerns over its impact on the November elections. There was pressure from the campaign for the president to make an address on the crisis, per McGurk.
McGurk wrote of the rehearsal, “In the Map Room, Biden peered at two screens behind me. ‘Jeffrey, Steven, welcome,’ he said. I turned around to see Jeffery Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg on Zoom. They greeted Biden warmly, Spielberg saying this was the speech they wanted to hear.
“It was a reminder that while I saw this speech as a policy address with a functional aim, it had a political purpose, too,” McGurk wrote.
He added, “The speech was timed for Friday night in Israel, when much of the country shuts down, allowing time for us to shape its reception there and around the world. Notably, we did not inform Netanyahu that we were making the speech until shortly before Biden delivered it, as we knew the address would lock Netanyahu into the terms of the deal now on the table.
“Biden said he was ready.
“Katzenberg advised, ‘Remember, slow Joe, let the audience hear every word.’
“Biden smiled, ‘Slow Joe? Don’t let Jill hear that.’
“He read through the draft, pausing at times to ask questions about the text, which we addressed with rewrites.”
McGurk wrote that he found Biden “fully engaged, leaning forward on the podium.”
He wrote, “The moguls told him he looked strong, and he did. There was no sign of the Biden we’d all see on a debate stage with Trump only four weeks later.”
The latter was a reference to Biden’s disastrous debate performance against Trump. What followed were weeks of calls on Biden to drop out, coming from some elected Democrats and prominent donors, until he exited the race on July 19. Katzenberg had played a prominent role as a top adviser to Biden’s re-election campaign.
While the Biden speech focused on a peace proposal, as it turned out, it would take until the next year, a week before Trump returned to office, for a ceasefire agreement to be reached.
A class action settlement related to deceptive Amazon Prime practices began paying out to eligible customers in fall 2026.
Rating:
Context
Eligible Amazon Prime customers do not need to do anything to receive their payment. The FTC is also warning people that some scammers are exploiting the legitimate class action lawsuit to steal people’s personal information. The FTC said it will not call any eligible customers, nor will they demand money or promise a special prize.
Rumors are spreading online about supposed payouts from a class action lawsuit benefiting Amazon Prime subscribers.
Social media users on platforms like Reddit and Facebook shared screenshots of notifications about the lawsuit or receiving payment (screenshotted). Some online posters claimed they received payment, whereas others asked if the settlement was real.
Snopes readers also searched the website for information on the Amazon Prime lawsuit.
This is a legitimate settlement involving payouts to eligible Amazon Prime customers.
The Federal Trade Commission reached a $2.5 billion settlement with Amazon over allegations that the company “enrolled tens of millions of customers in Amazon Prime subscriptions without their knowledge or consent” and “made it difficult for customers to cancel their Amazon Prime subscriptions.” As part of the settlement, Amazon did not admit fault.
An official notice on the Federal Trade Commission website states that Amazon began sending payments in November 2025 and “will continue to send automatic refunds to eligible Prime customers through April 2027.”
Customers who received a previous payment of up to $51 may receive additional payments due to a revised settlement order. Eligible customers may receive up to $200 in total (so up to $149 if you received a $51 payment previously).
It is worth noting, however, that the FTC is also warning people that scammers are calling people and claiming to be part of the Amazon class action lawsuit payouts.
“The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. And no one from Amazon will ever ask you for money to get a refund,” the FTC website said. “Only scammers say they can get you special access or a guaranteed refund.”
Eligibility and payment process
According to the FTC, eligible claimants do not need to take any actions to receive a refund. Amazon will send automatic refund payments by mailed check, PayPal or Venmo, and all you need to do is accept the payment.
Here’s how to know if you’re eligible, per the FTC’s news release (emphasis theirs):
Who is eligible for a refund?
Under the revised settlement order, you are eligible for a refund if you meet all three requirements:
You are an Amazon Prime customer in the United States.
You signed up for an Amazon Prime subscription through a “challenged enrollment flow” or tried to cancel through the online cancellation flow but were unable to do so between June 23, 2019 and June 23, 2025.
You used no more than 20 Amazon Prime Benefits (including Prime Music or Prime Video products offered for free to Prime subscribers) in any 12-month period following Amazon Prime enrollment.
The “challenged enrollment flows” are universal Prime decision page, shipping selection page, single page checkout, or the Prime Video enrollment flow.
No action is needed to receive a refund. You do not have to file a claim, respond to a notice, or complete any forms. Amazon will send automatic payments to eligible customers.
How to check if a class action lawsuit is legitimate
In the case of the Amazon settlement, the FTC’s news release on the federal agency’s official website — with a “.gov” domain — lends it legitimacy.
However, Snopes has previously verified class action lawsuits that are not brought by the government. In those cases, it’s worth checking the lawsuit’s case number in PACER, a public database for federal electronic court records, or CourtListener, a more user-friendly nonprofit repository that pulls information from PACER documents and other court records.
Even if the FTC did not make an announcement, for example, the screenshots of payments shared on social media include a case number for the Amazon settlement: 2:23-cv-01372.
Searching that case number in CourtListener returned two pages of results. On the second page, there’s a case called “In re: Amazon Return Policy Litigation.” That’s proof that a real lawsuit has been filed. The case page includes links to all the documents in the court docket for that particular case. A document titled, “Exhibit A – Amazon Settlement Agreement” states that a settlement was reached.
.svg){kind=link}
