False. Ottawa police are required to be vaccinated.
They were initially exempt -- the clip here is from October -- but still at 84% fully vaxxed even *before* Ottawa reversed course and set a Jan. 31 deadline. Now, of 1,480 officers, fewer than 10 haven't received a dose.
CTV didn't report anything false. The news segment Mitchell tweeted out was from October, when Ottawa police were exempt. Days later, Ottawa got rid of the exemption.
Lots of others are making this claim, too, some of them sharing the CTV clip from 3.5 months ago, before Ottawa changed its policy. (CTV's website could be much clearer in dating its old videos, but still.)
This is another imaginary Ottawa-protest-related claim, just fiction. No judge has ordered police to give back fuel they’d seized from protesters. The viral video doesn’t actually show police returning fuel.
And this one lie quickly turned into three lies. (Quick thread)
After protest supporters invented a court order requiring police to return fuel, and that false claim was repeated on a livestream by prominent protest man Pat King, other protest supporters got mad that police were defying the (again, nonexistent) court order. (2/3)
Also, people started making false claims that police were indeed returning fuel under the (nonexistent) court order but maliciously mixing the fuel with water. These claims have gotten hundreds of thousands of views on YouTube. (3/3)
Dan Bongino's Fox show took a website's list of the most healthy US cities and turned it into a graphic titled "TOP TEN MOST UNHEALTHY U.S. CITIES," which it used to back Bongino's claim that Democrats don't care about urban deaths. Nice catch by @Acyn.
I'm not sure if everyone on the left is aware that the controversy about Walensky's comments as they relate to people with disabilities has been followed by a separate controversy on the right about the same comments as they relate to Americans' risk of dying of Covid.
There are a bunch of "the unedited comment changes nothing, she was still devaluing disabled lives!" tweets. That's subjective; people can debate it all they want. But the unedited comment clearly shows that the other controversy is based on a misinterpretation of what she said.
Like, I'm getting a ton of messages like this...even though I'm dealing with an entirely different controversy, about right-wing commentators wrongly depicting Walensky's comments, and not touching the argument that she demeaned disabled people, which is not fact-checkable.
Lots of unvaccinated people who’ve died of Covid have also had lots of comorbidities. My point, which has been made by others, is that Walensky’s comments on Good Morning America are being inaccurately described
Biden's sentence: "We're gonna keep at it to ensure the American people are paying their fair share for gas - not being gouged for gas." This rapidly spreading Post Millennial clip cuts out the "gouged" clause to make him sound out of touch or something.
) and others have posted the truncated 12-second clip. The Michigan GOP and Rep. Dan Bishop, among others, then amplified it.
(Postscript: I honestly don't even see how the deceptively truncated quote is being interpreted as Biden saying current gas prices are fair, but the full quote certainly makes it more clear that he isn't saying that.)
Biden made two false claims in this short section of his remarks yesterday on the Virginia election:
It's unusual in recent decades for a VA governor candidate to win with a partymate as president, but far from unprecedented: McAuliffe himself did it in 2013; Republicans did it in 1969 and (with a party-switching former Dem governor) in 1973; lots of Dems did it prior.
(And no, Biden couldn’t have been talking only about sitting governors, since a) he was talking about McAuliffe’s performance; b) more importantly, sitting Virginia governors can’t even run for re-election.)