Examples-of-fake-news.txt

Examples of input and the output generated by the markov model.

-Input 1: From the Washington Post
The Pentagon’s top watchdog has launched an investigation into money that former national security adviser and retired Army Lt. Gen.
Michael Flynn received from foreign groups, a new wrinkle in the downfall of President Trump’s ousted national security adviser.

The Pentagon office will try to determine whether Flynn “failed to obtain required approval prior to receiving” the payments, according 
to an April 11 letter from Defense Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine to Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), the chairman of the House 
Oversight Committee. In the past, the Pentagon has advised retiring officers that because they can be recalled to military service, they
may be subject to the Constitution’s rarely enforced emoluments clause, which prohibits top officials from receiving payments or favors
from foreign governments.

[Pentagon weighs response to Flynn working on behalf of Turkish interests without U.S. permission]

Flynn received $45,000 to appear in 2015 with Russian President Vladimir Putin at a gala dinner for RT, a Kremlin-controlled media 
organization. He also worked as a foreign agent representing Turkish interests for a Netherlands-based company, Inovo BV, which paid his
company $530,000 in the fall.

Defense Department guidelines warn that the department’s top financial officer, the comptroller, “may pursue debt collection” if a 
retired officer does not seek permission to accept foreign payments before doing so. Any debt collection due to an emoluments clause
violation is capped at no more than what an individual makes in retirement pay during a period of unauthorized employment. In Flynn’s
case, that is more than $35,000 for the three months of the Inovo project.

Flynn was fired as national security adviser in February after revelations that he misled Vice President Pence about the nature of his
communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States. The pugnacious retired officer, who last year led “lock her up” chants
about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, filed paperwork as a foreign agent about three weeks later, on March 7.

Flynn’s lawyer, Robert K. Kelner, has argued that the retired general briefed the Defense Intelligence Agency, from which he retired in
2014, before and after his 2015 Russia trip.

But a letter DIA sent the House committee said that the agency has no record of Flynn seeking permission or approval to accept money
from a foreign source, potentially countering Kelner’s argument. Kelner did not respond to requests for comment Thursday.

Flynn also did not seek permission from the U.S. government to work as a paid foreign agent for Turkish interests, U.S. defense 
officials said last month, raising the possibility that the Pentagon could dock his retirement pay. Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentag
on spokesman, said then that the Defense Department was reviewing the issue. The Army had no record of Flynn seeking permission for that
arrange, military officials said.

The issue involving Turkey emerged after Flynn retroactively registered in March with the Justice Department as a foreign agent for work
that his company, Flynn Intel Group, carried out on behalf of Inovo BV. It is owned by Turkish businessman Ekim Alptekin, who is not a 
part of the Turkish government but has links to it.

Flynn’s company received three payments between September and November from Inovo BV before Trump was elected president and the 
arrangement was discontinued, according to Flynn’s filings. Flynn is the majority owner and chief executive officer of the Flynn Intel
Group.

On Thursday, the White House deflected any criticism that they failed to properly vet Flynn to be Trump’s top security adviser. Press
Secretary Sean Spicer said any improper actions by Flynn also flew under the radar of the Obama administration: The Department of 
Defense issued Flynn a new security clearance in 2016, and Flynn took his trip to Russian 2015.

“All of the clearance was made during the Obama administration, and apparently with knowledge of the trip that he took,” Spicer said.

But beyond checking Flynn’s security clearance, Spicer indicated the Trump administration didn’t do much other vetting — something that
is typical.

When asked by reporters if the president had any regrets bringing Flynn on in the first place, Spicer said: “I think the president made
the right decision at the right time, and it’s been pretty clear.”

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, also released an Oct. 8, 2014, letter Thursday in which a
Defense Department lawyer warned Flynn upon his retirement from military service that he was forbidden from receiving payments from 
foreign sources without receiving permission from the U.S. government first.

“These documents raise grave questions about why Gen. Flynn concealed the payments he received from foreign sources after he was warned
explicitly by the Pentagon,” Cummings said. “Our next step is to get the documents we are seeking from the White House so we can 
complete our investigation.  I thank the Department of Defense for providing us with unclassified versions of these documents.”

Cummings also alleged that the White House was covering up by Flynn by not willingly releasing all documents associated with his case.
Spicer disputed that later in the day saying that it was “not true” and he was “taken aback” by the accusation.

Bruce Anderson, a spokesman for the Defense Department inspector general, said that the investigation into Flynn began April 4. The 
watchdog’s office did not discuss the investigation publicly until after the House Oversight Committee released documents about it, and
it typically does not disclose what it is reviewing while an investigation is underway.

The latest revelations from the Pentagon came as congressional Democrats put more pressure on Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of
the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, to make good on vows to investigate the Flynn matter.

Democrats on the panel reminded Chaffetz that for years he has warned witnesses that complying with committee requests “is not an
optional exercise.”

“Your decisions on this investigation will have a profound impact on the faith that the American people have in Congress to act in an
even-handed manner and fulfill our duty under the Constitution to exercise robust oversight of the Executive Branch, regardless of who
occupies the White House,” the Democrats added.

Chaffetz announced on Wednesday that he is planning to take a medical leave of up to four weeks to repair screws implanted in his foot
years ago after an accident. It is likely that House GOP leaders will appoint an interim chairman in his absence.

Two Republican members who emerged Thursday from the room with the documents about Flynn brushed off questions from reporters. But a
group of Democrats on the committee addressed the media.

“The information that we received this morning was quite troubling. Actually, it left us with more questions, I would say, than
answers,” said Rep. Val Butler Demings (D-Fla.).

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said they just came a classified briefing and could not discuss the material they reviewed. She said the
materiel ought to be declassified for the American people “read it and judge for themselves.”

The Democrats demanded further documents from the White House.

“They have already told us they have documents with respect to General Flynn. And we’ve received zero documents,” said Rep. Stephen 
Lynch (D-Mass.). “So they’ve told us we have these documents and they’ve been widely reported in the press that they have the documents,
yet they refuse to give it to Congress.”

Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) said that after reviewing the documents, he believes lawmakers should “keep digging” on Flynn.

Cartwright declined to share specifics about what the documents entail, but said Republican members of the oversight panel should be 
pushing the White House to release more information about what top administration officials knew about Flynn during the presidential 
campaign, transition and in the early days of Trump’s presidency.

-Output 1: Length: 2000, Order: 12
The Pentagon’s top watchdog has launched an investigation into Flynn began April 4. The watchdog’s office did not discuss the 
investigation publicly until after the House Oversight Committee, to make good on vows to investigate the Flynn matter.
Democrats on the panel reminded Chaffetz that for years he has warned witnesses that complying with committee requests “is not an 
optional exercise.” “Your decisions on this investigation is underway. The latest revelations that he misled Vice President Pence
about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States. The pugnacious retired officer,
who last year led “lock her up” chants about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, filed paperwork as a foreign agent
for Turkish interests for a Netherlands-based company, Inovo BV, which paid his company $530,000 in the fall. Defense Department
guidelines warn that the department’s top financial officer, the comptroller, “may pursue debt collection” if a retired officer
does not seek permission from the U.S. government but has links to it. Flynn’s company received three payments before doing so.
Any debt collection due to an emoluments clause violation is capped at no more than what an individual makes in retirement from 
military service, they may be subject to the Constitution to exercise robust oversight of the Executive Branch, regardless of who
occupies the White House deflected any criticism that they failed to properly vet Flynn to be Trump’s top security adviser.
Press Secretary Sean Spicer said. But beyond checking Flynn’s security clearance, Spicer indicated the Trump administration didn’t
do much other vetting — something that is typical. When asked by reporters if the presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, filed 
paperwork as a foreign agent representing Turkish interests for a Netherlands-based company, Inovo BV, which paid his company, 
Flynn Intel Group, carried out on behalf of Inovo BV. It is owned by Turkish businessman Ekim Alptekin, who is not a part of the 
Turkish government but has links to it. Flynn’s company received this morning was quite troubling. Actually, it left us with more
questions, I would say, than answers,” said Rep. Val Butler Demings (D-Fla.). Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said they just came a
classified briefing and could not discuss the investigation into Flynn began April 4. The watchdog’s office did not discuss the
investigation publicly until after the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, to make good on vows to investigate the
Flynn matter. Democrats on the committee said that the agency has no record of Flynn seeking permission or approval to accept money
from a foreign sources without receiving permission from the U.S. government but has links to it. Flynn’s company received three
payments before doing so. Any debt collection” if a retired officer does not seek permission for that arrange, military officials
said last month, raising the possibility that the Pentagon could dock his retirement pay. Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman,
said then that the Defense Intelligence Agency, from which he retired in 2014, before and after his 2015 Russia trip. But a letter DIA
sent the House committee said that the investigation into money that former national security adviser. Press Secretary Sean Spicer said:
“I think the president made the right decision at the right time, and it’s been pretty clear.” Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), the top
Democrat on the Oversight Committee. In the past, the Pentagon has advised retiring officers that because they can be recalled to
military service that he was forbidden from receiving payments or favors from foreign groups, a new wrinkle in the downfall of
President Trump’s ousted national security adviser. The Pentagon’s top watchdog has launched an investigation into Flynn began April 4.
The watchdog’s office did not discuss the investigation into Flynn began April 4. The watchdog’s office did not discuss the material
they reviewed. She said the materiel ought to be declassified for the American people have in Congress to act in an even-handed manner
and fulfill our duty under the Constitution to exercise robust oversight of the Executive Branch, regardless of who occupies the White
House deflected any criticism that they failed to properly vet Flynn to be Trump’s top security adviser in February after revelations
from the Pentagon could dock his retirement from military service, they may be subject to the Constitution’s rarely enforced emoluments
clause violation is capped at no more than what an individual makes in retirement pay during a period of unauthorized employment.
In Flynn’s case, that is more than $35,000 for the three months of the Inovo project. Flynn was fired as national security adviser.
Press Secretary Sean Spicer said. But beyond checking Flynn’s security clearance in 2016, and Flynn took his trip to Russian 2015. 
“All of the clearance was made during the Obama admin
***************************************************************************************************************************************
-Input 2: From the Washington Post
When you order ahi tuna tartare at a D.C. restaurant, can you be sure that’s what you’re getting? A new study from George Washington
University found that some restaurants are serving similar, but not the exact, species of fish advertised on local menus.

A group of scientists led by Keith Crandall of the university’s Milken Institute School of Public Health tested 12 dishes at six seafood
chains with locations in Washington to see if the fish or crustacean DNA matched what it was called on the menu. They found that one-
third of the samples were incorrectly labeled.

But these weren’t cases in which tilapia was being sold as snapper. In most of the mislabeled samples, the DNA matched a closely related
species and wasn’t an egregious substitution.

The study discovered “pretty mild substitutions,” Crandall said. “We didn’t see anything that looked like some kind of comprehensive
fraud, to swap out an expensive piece of seafood for something much less expensive.”

Still, there were a few restaurants whose results might raise an eyebrow. At Bobby Van’s steakhouse, a dish advertised as a rock shrimp
tempura was a DNA match with whiteleg shrimp, which is typically a much cheaper, farmed shrimp.

The testing was performed in 2015, and Bobby Van’s doesn’t have a rock shrimp tempura on the current menu. Jonathan Langle, the chain’s
head of operations for Washington, said he doesn’t recall it being on the menu, and that it may have been a special.

“We buy products that we trust and we know, and I pray to God that we didn’t get a bait and switch, where we bought something, and they
switched the box,” Langle said. “It’s something that we are always concerned about.”

Restaurants have good reason to be concerned about seafood fraud, which was the subject of a wide-ranging 2013 study by the advocacy
group Oceana. That organization found that one-third of all seafood sold in restaurants and grocery stores is mislabeled, sometimes
fraudulently. When seafood is substituted, it could mean swapping a pricey fish for a less-expensive one and charging a brand-name
markup.

It could also have environmental and health impacts. Some instances of fish fraud could conceal overfished species that aren’t 
recommended on the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch list, a guide that helps consumers buy sustainable seafood. Others could 
conceal farmed fish, which may have been raised with antibiotics and fungicides, or fish that come from countries with poor labor
practices.

Legislation in Washington authorizes consumers to sue companies for selling products that aren’t properly labeled. That was one of the
motives behind the study, which was co-authored and partly sponsored by attorney Jason Rathod of Migliaccio & Rathod LLP, a law firm
specializing in consumer protection and unfair trade practices.

Because the discrepancies were slight — as in the substitution of a different types of tuna or toothfish that have close genetic links —
Rathod felt that a class-action suit was unlikely to succeed.

“At least from a scientific perspective, as fraud,” Rathod said. “We decided that it wasn’t worth pursuing.”

Still, consumers might be curious to know that, at Joe’s Seafood, Prime Steak and Stone Crab, an advertised ahi tuna tartare was
actually albacore tuna, which is “half the price” at wholesale, according to Glenn Casten, a fishmonger with ProFish, a seafood
distributor in Washington.

Ahi is a Hawaiian word that restaurants often use to refer to both bigeye and yellowfin tuna. Though some sushi restaurants call
albacore “tombo ahi,” “you would not see, on a non-sushi menu, albacore being called ahi — or you shouldn’t,” Casten said.

“We have no knowledge of anything such as this happening at our restaurant,” a spokeswoman for the restaurant said in an email. “Joe’s
Seafood, Prime Steak & Stone Crab is committed to working with our vendors to source the highest quality products and ingredients
possible.”

Another dish on Joe’s menu, the Chilean sea bass, was a perfect genetic match with its menu listing. Many of the restaurant dishes 
passed with flying colors; Gordon Biersch’s yellowfin tuna, McCormick and Schmick’s Chilean sea bass and the Oceanaire’s Australian
barramundi were exactly as advertised. The snapper salsa verde on Legal Sea Foods’ menu was, indeed, snapper. And, curiously, McCormick
and Schmick’s sesame-crusted albacore tuna turned out to be yellowfin tuna — typically, a more expensive fish.

“I’d give them a pretty good grade,” Crandall said, even of the restaurants with slight substitutions. “I’d eat at these places.”

-Output 2: Length 2000, Order 7
When you order ahi tuna tartare at a D.C. restaurant,” a spokeswoman for the restaurant, can you be sure that’s what you’re getting? 
A new study from George Washington. Ahi is a Hawaiian word that it wasn’t worth pursuing.” Still, there were a few restaurants have 
good reason to be yellowfin tuna — typically, a more expensive fish. “I’d eat at these weren’t cases in which was the subject of a 
wide-ranging 2013 study discovered “pretty mild substitutions,” Crandall of the motives behind the Oceanaire’s Australian barramundi
were exact, species that we trust and we know, and I pray to God that it may have been a special. “We buy products that a class-action
suit was called on the current menu. They found that restaurants have good reason to be concerned about seafood distributor in 
Washington authorizes consumers to source the highest quality products that a class-action suit was unlikely to succeed. 
“At least from a scientists led by Keith Crandall said. “We didn’t see anything that we are always concerned about seafood sold in
restaurants often use to refer to both bigeye and yellowfin tuna — typically, a more expensive fish. “I’d give them a pretty mild
substitutions. “I’d eat at these weren’t cases in which may have been raised with flying colors; Gordon Biersch’s yellowfin tuna —
typically, a more expensive.” Still, consumers might raise an eyebrow. At Bobby Van’s steakhouse, a dish advertised as a rock shrimp,
which tilapia was being on the current menu. Jonathan Langle, the chain’s head of operations in Washington to see if the fish or
crustacean DNA matched what it may have been a specializing in consumer protection and unfair trade practices. Because the discrepancies
were slight — as in the substitutions. “I’d give them a pretty mild substitution of a different types of tuna or toothfish that have a
rock shrimp, which was the substitutions. “I’d eat at these places.”When you order ahi tuna tartare was actually albacore tuna tartare
was actually albacore “tombo ahi,” “you would not see, on a non-sushi menu, and that it was called on the menu, and they switched the
box,” Langle said. “We didn’t get a bait and switched the box,” Langle said. “We decided that we trust and we know, and I pray to God
that one-third of all seafood for something, and the study, which is typically a much cheaper, farmed fish, which tilapia was being 
called ahi tuna turned out to be concerned about.” Restaurant dishes at six seafood fraud, which tilapia was being sold as snapper. 
And, curiously, McCormick and Schmick’s Chilean sea bass, was a perfect genetic match with its menu listing. Many of the samples, the
DNA matched what it was called on the menu. Jonathan Langle, the chain’s head of operations in Washington, said he doesn’t have close
genetic match with whiteleg shrimp tempura was a DNA matched a closely related species that we didn’t see anything such as this 
happening at our restaurants have good reason to be yellowfin tuna — typically, a more expensive fish. “I’d give them a pretty good 
grade,” Crandall said. “We decided that we are always concerned about.” Restaurants have good reason to be concerned about seafood for 
something that looked like some kind of comprehensive fraud, which is “half the price” at wholesale, according to Glenn Casten said. 
“We have no knowledge of anything such as this happening at our restaurants are serving similar, but not the exactly as advertised.
The study by the advocacy group of scientists led by Keith Crandall said, even of the mislabeled, sometimes fraudulently. 
When seafood is substitutions,” Crandall said. “It’s something that we are always concerned about seafood fraud,” Rathod LLP,
a law firm specializing in consumers buy sustainable seafood fraud, which is typically a much cheaper, farmed fish, which is 
“half the price” at wholesale, according to Glenn Casten said. “We didn’t see anything such as this happening at our restaurants call
albacore “tombo ahi,” “you would not see, on a non-sushi menu, albacore “tombo ahi,” “you would not see, on a non-sushi menu, the
Chilean sea bass and they switch, where we bought something much less expensive fish. “I’d give them a pretty good grade,” Crandall
said, even of the motives behind the Oceana. That organization found that restaurant, can you be sure that’s what you’re getting?
A new study discovered “pretty good grade,” Crandall said. “It’s something much less expensive.” Still, there were a few restaurant
dishes at six seafood is substitution. The snapper salsa verde on Legal Sea Foods’ menu was, indeed, snapper. In most of the 
restaurants whose results might be curiously, McCormick and Stone Crab is committed to working with our vendors to sue companies for
selling products that we didn’t see anything that looked like some kind of comprehensive piece of seafood chains with slight substitute
School of Public Health tested 12 dishes passed with flying colors; Gordon Biersch’s yellowfin tuna. Though some sushi restaurants are
servin
***************************************************************************************************************************************
-Input 3: From NPR
NASA's Cassini spacecraft is giving earthlings their closest-ever views of Saturn's swirled atmosphere and its massive hurricane,
beaming a trove of images and data back to Earth after the craft made its first dive between Saturn and its rings Wednesday.

Cassini is "showing us new wonders and demonstrating where our curiosity can take us if we dare," said Jim Green, director of NASA's
Planetary Science Division.

The raw images are being fed into a photo stream on NASA's website, and while they lack detailed captions and annotations, they provide
entrancing views of the planet's complex atmosphere.

In the maneuver that sent Cassini between Saturn and its rings, the craft went over the planet's north pole, where it captured the first
high-resolution image of the mammoth storm back in 2013. The eye of the storm was measured at more than 1,000 miles wide.

The vortex is swirling inside "a large, mysterious, six-sided weather pattern known as the hexagon," NASA has said.

As of Thursday morning, more than 100 images had arrived from Saturn. Some show what look to be ethereal blips and blotches against the
planet's swirling clouds. Other images tantalize with patterns of striated clouds and whorls of disturbance.

Cassini captured the images over the past 24 hours, but it couldn't send them back to Earth until early Thursday because the craft was
using its 13-foot-wide antenna as a deflector shield to protect it from ice and rock particles. Right on schedule, the craft made
contact with NASA's Deep Space Network at the Goldstone Complex in California's Mojave Desert just before 3 a.m. ET Thursday.

"No spacecraft has ever been this close to Saturn before. We could only rely on predictions, based on our experience with Saturn's other
rings, of what we thought this gap between the rings and Saturn would be like," said Cassini Project Manager Earl Maize of NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.

All went according to the plan, Maize said, adding that after its dive, the craft that has now been in space for nearly 20 years "has
come out the other side in excellent shape."

As we reported Wednesday, Cassini has now begun what NASA calls its Grand Finale, as it weaves its way between Saturn and its rings in a
series of 22 dives that will culminate in what the agency describes as "a science-rich plunge into Saturn's atmosphere on Sept. 15."

-Output 3:  Length 750, Order 3
"NASA has if website, thour experience-rican ther Earticles if weathe plane, as arrich planet's weave be like," NASA has thought ove of
the said Jim Green that show because they lack deflectorm back inst been Sept. 15."NASA calls its ring us now beam only reported into
provide ent Cassini space first they lack demonst has manet's said. As of the craft mammoth planeuver rings in Pasade ethey lack into
stone Complex in Cassive, as its ring to provide. Californings, ther ring close the and data back demons oth pole, the vortex is 
givision oursday between Saturn wonders "has now between there before be like," said. As of strations, because to a photo between in
Cassini befor new whorls of striate images in and its 13-foot-wided and and blips ann"
***************************************************************************************************************************************
-Input 4: Same article as Input 3 this shows you what happens when you increase the order
NASA's Cassini spacecraft is giving earthlings their closest-ever views of Saturn's swirled atmosphere and its massive hurricane,
beaming a trove of images and data back to Earth after the craft made its first dive between Saturn and its rings Wednesday.

Cassini is "showing us new wonders and demonstrating where our curiosity can take us if we dare," said Jim Green, director of NASA's
Planetary Science Division.

The raw images are being fed into a photo stream on NASA's website, and while they lack detailed captions and annotations, they provide
entrancing views of the planet's complex atmosphere.

In the maneuver that sent Cassini between Saturn and its rings, the craft went over the planet's north pole, where it captured the first
high-resolution image of the mammoth storm back in 2013. The eye of the storm was measured at more than 1,000 miles wide.

The vortex is swirling inside "a large, mysterious, six-sided weather pattern known as the hexagon," NASA has said.

As of Thursday morning, more than 100 images had arrived from Saturn. Some show what look to be ethereal blips and blotches against the
planet's swirling clouds. Other images tantalize with patterns of striated clouds and whorls of disturbance.

Cassini captured the images over the past 24 hours, but it couldn't send them back to Earth until early Thursday because the craft was
using its 13-foot-wide antenna as a deflector shield to protect it from ice and rock particles. Right on schedule, the craft made
contact with NASA's Deep Space Network at the Goldstone Complex in California's Mojave Desert just before 3 a.m. ET Thursday.

"No spacecraft has ever been this close to Saturn before. We could only rely on predictions, based on our experience with Saturn's other
rings, of what we thought this gap between the rings and Saturn would be like," said Cassini Project Manager Earl Maize of NASA's Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.

All went according to the plan, Maize said, adding that after its dive, the craft that has now been in space for nearly 20 years "has
come out the other side in excellent shape."

As we reported Wednesday, Cassini has now begun what NASA calls its Grand Finale, as it weaves its way between Saturn and its rings in a
series of 22 dives that will culminate in what the agency describes as "a science-rich plunge into Saturn's atmosphere on Sept. 15."

-Output 4: Length 750, Order 12
NASA's Cassini spacecraft has ever been this close to Saturn before. We could only rely on predictions, based on our experience with 
Saturn's other rings, of what we thought this gap between the rings and Saturn would be like," said Cassini Project Manager Earl Maize
of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. All went according to the plan, Maize said, adding that after its dive, the
craft made its first dive between Saturn and its rings in a series of 22 dives that will culminate in what the agency describes as "a
science-rich plunge into Saturn's atmosphere on Sept. 15."NASA's Cassini spacecraft has ever been this close to Saturn before. We could
only rely on predictions, based on our experience with Saturn's other rings, of
***************************************************************************************************************************************
-Input 5: From the NY Times
WASHINGTON — As President Trump’s top economic advisers faced a barrage of questions on Wednesday about the tax plan they had just 
unfurled, there was one that they struggled most to answer: how to keep the “massive tax cuts” they proposed from ballooning the federal
deficit.

The White House insists that economic growth will cover the cost, which could be as high as $7 trillion over a decade. But the question
will dog Republicans and could fracture their party as they face the prospect of endorsing a plan that many economists and budget
analysts warn will increase the deficit. After years of fiscal hawkishness, conservatives now face a moment of truth about whether they
truly believe America’s economy is drowning in debt.

Some skeptics are already ringing alarm bells, fearing that Republicans will sign on to what critics see as a dangerous plan composed by
a president who called himself the King of Debt.

“It seems the administration is using economic growth like magic beans: the cheap solution to all our problems,” said Maya MacGuineas,
president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan group that advocates fiscal restraint. “But there is no
golden goose at the top of the tax-cut beanstalk, just mountains of debt.”

Ms. MacGuineas’s group estimates that Mr. Trump’s plan could reduce federal tax revenue by $3 trillion to $7 trillion over a decade. The
economy would need to grow at a rate of 4.5 percent — more than double its projected rate, an unlikely prospect — to make the plan self-
financing.

While Mr. Trump and his team point to the growth linked to tax cuts passed by previous presidents, today’s economy is different from
that of 1981 or 2001, when Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush cut tax rates.

The Congressional Budget Office projects that the federal debt will grow by $10 trillion over the next decade. By 2027, the deficit
could reach $1.4 trillion, or 5 percent of the economy, it says.

The office’s predictions have been off before, and the impact of tax cuts on the economy is a matter of debate, as so many variables
determine a country’s economic fortunes. But tax historians and veterans of previous tax fights are quick to point out that lower rates
are not necessarily a panacea for slow growth.

“This is fool’s gold that you’ll cut taxes, everybody will work harder, more money will come and you’ll erase the fiscal impact,” said
Steve Bell, who was a Republican staff director of the Senate Budget Committee from 1981 to 1986. “It never happens.”

Joseph J. Thorndike, director of the Tax History Project at Tax Analysts, said the Trump plan appeared to have strong parallels with 
Reagan’s 1981 cuts. Mr. Thorndike recalled that the Reagan administration soon realized the problem of the red ink it was facing and 
started looking for new sources of revenue.
“This looks like ’81, where they said, ‘Deficit be damned, we want to do a tax cut,’” Mr. Thorndike said. “It’s a cautionary tale.”

Twenty years later, the Bush tax cuts, which reduced the top individual tax rates and increased the standard deduction for low-income
households, took place in a different environment. Mr. Bush made the case that it was time to spend the nation’s surplus to jump-start a
flagging economy.

“It’s very important to recognize that the fiscal situation today is not what it was in 2001,” said Scott Greenberg of the Tax
Foundation, a nonpartisan group. “Instead of facing a large projected surplus, the country faces a large projected deficit.”

The White House’s outline was too thin on details to allow for a concrete analysis of how much deficits would grow. There were no
specifics about what income would fall into the three, instead of seven, individual tax brackets. The explanation of how the mammoth
switch to a territorial corporate tax system would work was vague. There was no word on how low the tax on repatriated foreign corporate
earnings would be. And Gary D. Cohn, the director of the president’s National Economic Council, could not say how much of a tax cut a
middle-income American would get.

The debate over the impact of the plan is only beginning. If Republicans are not able to make the cuts revenue-neutral — that is,
causing no increase in the deficit — they will need the support of Democrats to get 60 votes in the Senate and make the legislation
permanent under budget reconciliation rules. Otherwise, any changes to the tax code will expire in 10 years.

While Republicans in the House, Senate and Trump administration have said they do not want to add to the deficit, there is a growing
acknowledgment of the possibility that they will need to settle for temporary tax cuts. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday
that short-term cuts were better than nothing. And Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, the influential Republican chairman of the Senate
Finance Committee, said this week that he could live with cuts that added to the deficit if it meant getting the economy moving faster.

Republican budget hawks will need to decide whether they want to stick to the arguments of fiscal responsibility that they used to
bludgeon Democrats during the Obama era. One of those hawks, Senator Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, said Wednesday, “Rather than
conforming to arbitrary budget constraints, the president’s plan rightfully aims to jump-start investment, which will produce
significantly more revenue for the Treasury over the long term than any revenue-neutral tax plan could generate.”

Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, who was a fierce critic of deficits when he was a member of Congress,
offered a glimpse of the rationale his former colleagues might embrace. “As a conservative, that bothers me a little bit,” he said 
Tuesday on CNN of the possibility that Mr. Trump’s tax plan would increase the deficit. “But we also look at deficits through sort of a
different lens.”

For Democrats, now out of power, the reversal is bitterly ironic, and several lawmakers assailed the president for, they said, preparing
to cripple the country with debt.

“I’m not the first to observe that a Republican Congress only cares about the deficit when a Democrat is in the White House,” said Alan
B. Krueger, the Princeton economist who was chairman of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. “It may be that Dick
Cheney is right and that deficits don’t matter to the public, but they do matter to the economy.”

“This is a thing of beauty, a thing of wonder,” Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, said of Mr. Trump’s one-page
plan. “Growth, growth, growth!”

-Output 5: Length 5000, Order 21
WASHINGTON — As President Trump’s top economic advisers faced a barrage of questions on Wednesday about the tax plan they had just
unfurled, there was one that they struggled most to answer: how to keep the “massive tax cuts” they proposed from ballooning the federal
deficit. The White House insists that economic growth will cover the cost, which could be as high as $7 trillion over a decade. 
The economy would need to grow at a rate of 4.5 percent — more than double its projected rate, an unlikely prospect — to make the
plan self-financing. While Mr. Trump and his team point to the growth linked to tax cuts passed by previous presidents, today’s 
economy is different from that of 1981 or 2001, when Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush cut tax rates. The Congressional 
Budget Office projects that the federal debt will grow by $10 trillion over the next decade. By 2027, the deficit could reach 
$1.4 trillion, or 5 percent of the economy, it says. The office’s predictions have been off before, and the impact of tax cuts on
the economy is a matter of debate, as so many variables determine a country’s economic fortunes. But tax historians and veterans of
previous tax fights are quick to point out that lower rates are not necessarily a panacea for slow growth. “This is fool’s gold that
you’ll cut taxes, everybody will work harder, more money will come and you’ll erase the fiscal impact,” said Steve Bell, who was a
Republican staff director of the Senate Budget Committee from 1981 to 1986. “It never happens.” Joseph J. Thorndike, director of the
Tax History Project at Tax Analysts, said the Trump plan appeared to have strong parallels with Reagan’s 1981 cuts. Mr. Thorndike
recalled that the Reagan administration soon realized the problem of the red ink it was facing and started looking for new sources
of revenue. “This looks like ’81, where they said, ‘Deficit be damned, we want to do a tax cut,’” Mr. Thorndike said. “It’s a
cautionary tale.” Twenty years later, the Bush tax cuts, which reduced the top individual tax rates and increased the standard
deduction for low-income households, took place in a different environment. Mr. Bush made the case that it was time to spend the
nation’s surplus to jump-start a flagging economy. “It’s very important to recognize that the fiscal situation today is not what 
it was in 2001,” said Scott Greenberg of the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan group. “Instead of facing a large projected surplus, the
country faces a large projected deficit.” The White House’s outline was too thin on details to allow for a concrete analysis of how
much deficits would grow. There were no specifics about what income would fall into the three, instead of seven, individual tax
brackets. The explanation of how the mammoth switch to a territorial corporate tax system would work was vague. There was no word on
how low the tax on repatriated foreign corporate earnings would be. And Gary D. Cohn, the director of the president’s National Economic
Council, could not say how much of a tax cut a middle-income American would get. The debate over the impact of the plan is only
beginning. If Republicans are not able to make the cuts revenue-neutral — that is, causing no increase in the deficit — they will need
the support of Democrats to get 60 votes in the Senate and make the legislation permanent under budget reconciliation rules. Otherwise,
any changes to the tax code will expire in 10 years. While Republicans in the House, Senate and Trump administration have said they do
not want to add to the deficit, there is a growing acknowledgment of the possibility that they will need to settle for temporary tax 
cuts. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday that short-term cuts were better than nothing. And Senator Orrin G. Hatch of
Utah, the influential Republican chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said this week that he could live with cuts that added to
the deficit if it meant getting the economy moving faster. Republican budget hawks will need to decide whether they want to stick to
the arguments of fiscal responsibility that they used to bludgeon Democrats during the Obama era. One of those hawks,
Senator Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, said Wednesday, “Rather than conforming to arbitrary budget constraints, the president’s
plan rightfully aims to jump-start investment, which will produce significantly more revenue for the Treasury over the long term than
any revenue-neutral tax plan could generate.” Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, who was a fierce critic
of deficits when he was a member of Congress, offered a glimpse of the rationale his former colleagues might embrace.
“As a conservative, that bothers me a little bit,” he said Tuesday on CNN of the possibility that they will need to settle for temporary
tax cuts. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday that short-term cuts were better than nothing. And Senator Orrin G. Hatch of
Utah, the influential Re
***************************************************************************************************************************************