Stand up for the facts!
Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy.
We need your help.
I would like to contribute
(Shutterstock)
Approaching 100 days of Donald Trump’s second presidency, PolitiFact has been fact-checking a whole host of topics related to the new administration, significant policy changes and, in some cases, the structure of the executive branch.
The media landscape has changed, especially for fact-checkers. Earlier this year, PolitiFact and other fact-checkers were in the headlines because Meta ended its large-scale fact-checking program in the United States after nearly a decade.
Readers have sounded off in social media comments, text messages, and in emails to reporters and truthometer@politifact.com. (Remember, you can always email us if you have fact-check suggestions.) Here is a collection of their criticism and comments since January, lightly edited for length and clarity:
Suggestions for different framing for our promise tracking
As PolitiFact has done for every incoming president since Barack Obama, we are tracking dozens of Trump’s second-term campaign promises, on the MAGA-Meter.
We are evaluating the new administration’s progress on 75 campaign promises with five ratings.
Sign up for PolitiFact texts
Promise Kept, Promise Broken, Compromise — those have a finality to them and, with some exceptions, will be used more toward the end of his four years marking the outcome of the promise.
We use two additional interim ratings as developments play out or stand still: In the Works and Stalled.
For example, Trump’s promise to reinstate the military's transgender ban has been blocked by a Judge. It’s Stalled. His promise to end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours? Promise Broken.
You can read more about our promise-tracking efforts, and you’ll see more updates as we approach 100 days of Trump’s presidency.
One reader said that the wording on our promise rating system was tripping them up:
"I take issue with your Promises Kept/Promises Broken 'nomenclature'. To me, a 'broken promise' is one that implies a conscious decision not to keep it - a betrayal, if you will.
"I prefer Promises Kept/Promises Not Kept. That lets me know that there were likely obstacles to keeping the promise out of the promiser's control, which I think can be attributed to most 'promises' that political candidates make. I think we're all capable of discerning which 'promises' are pie-in-the-sky or attempts to deceive for votes."
Another reader wanted to know more about the mechanism of why we track promises as we do.
"You know, a better way to track promises is to see why they weren’t kept. With politics being so brutal many things are lost in the fight. I just think this assessment is not hitting the mark. Just a thought."
Changes to Meta’s Third-Party Fact-Checking Program
In January, Meta announced an end to its partnerships with U.S.-based fact-checking organizations, including PolitiFact. Meta is adopting a community notes model like the one X uses.
Many of you wrote in with your support of our newsroom’s efforts to fact-check claims on Meta’s platforms: Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
"Facts are not censorship. The rhetoric (from Meta owner Mark Zuckerberg and others) in the headlines leaves the wrong impression of the day-in, day-out work of PolitiFact and nine outlets working in Meta’s U.S. fact-checking program."
"To me, it's obvious that Mark Z. is pandering to Trump by claiming fact-checking has a liberal slant as the reason to end the relationship. I've read PolitiFact checks on liberals and conservatives. I don't know this for sure, but maybe conservatives lie more than liberals which would explain the perceived liberal slant."
"Just to let you know that I, among others, am backing your team's approach to fact checking 100%. I have often, very often, noted that you claim falsehoods from liberals/Democrats as well as conservative/Republicans and everyone in between and on the outer edges."
"Among my group of acquaintances and friends, we value your daily and weekly input, and don’t know how you do it. But it certainly relieves our mind to know what we can see is the truth, the fact, the real story."
One Meta user, who appealed a rating we applied to their post a while back, wrote in support of our past work:
"I hope you all have good jobs moving forward, ahead of Zuck's changes. You've always been good to me, so I never had anything bad to say about fact checkers :) If anything, it made me make sure to double check things more often."
Shifting tariffs under Trump, and the economy
The economy was the topic of many reader emails of late. And covering the economy we are, from tariffs to consumer confidence to the bond market.
"As I have stated in the past, I will support when you decide to treat EACH PARTY EQUALLY," one reader wrote. "Yes you stress facts but mainly those that reflect poorly on Trump and the Republicans. I just filled up my SUV and gas prices since Trump took over are cheaper than most of Biden’s term. WHY?
"Also egg prices are cheaper WHY? Give Trump credit in the areas he does well in and stop only reporting the areas where you can be negative."
***
In the tumultuous week that followed Trump’s "Liberation Day" on April 2, social media posts falsely said National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett confirmed Trump was considering a 90-day pause of new tariffs. This news boosted the markets, even though there was no record of Hassett saying that in an April 7 interview. The White House dismissed the idea of a pause as "fake news." Our fact-check of those social media claims about Hassett published April 8.
On April 9, Trump announced a 90-day delay for some tariffs on all countries, except China — a reversal of his previous stance.
A reader sent in this note:
"Trump did actually suspend tariffs on almost all countries besides China, today.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114309144289505174
I believe that your article needs to be corrected."
We updated the fact-check with an editor’s note; our rating on the original statement remains False because Hassett never publicly confirmed a tariff delay.
***
We recently fact-checked a statement by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the former Democratic vice presidential nominee. Walz told CNN’s Jake Tapper on April 6 that Democrats need to do a better job reaching those voters who are hurting economically.
"They're concerned that their economic future is so precarious it could slip out from under them," Walz said. "Less than half of Americans have $1,000 in savings."
Research shows Americans do not feel financially stable, but Walz exaggerated the health of Americans’ savings accounts by giving the impression that nearly half have anemic reserves. It’s more like 28%. We rated his statement Mostly False.
Several readers highlighted Walz’s use of "less than half" and said we were too harsh.
"Exactly how have you reached the conclusion that Tim Walz’ statement is mostly false? He says less than half, 28% is less than half. That things are far worse than someone says, when their point is that things are bad, does not make their statement false, surely?"
What is a government audit, anyway?
In February, ABC’s "Shark Tank" star Kevin O’Leary said the federal government is "all fat" and said billionaire Elon Musk is "not cutting enough."
O’Leary said this about the federal government: "One hundred years of never being scrutinized, never been examined, never looking for any efficiencies."
We rated O’Leary’s statement Pants on Fire! For decades, inspectors general have audited the federal government, looking for waste, fraud and abuse. Their findings are public and accessible online.
One reader questioned the nature of this process:
"If the government audits itself, that’s not a real audit. Real audits are done by unrelated parties. General Motors has an internal audit department, but the real audit is done by Deloitte.
A reader suggestion on Colin Powell’s legacy
As the Trump administration ordered federal websites scrubbed of diversity, equity and inclusion references, social media users scrutinizing the websites said they noticed changes to Arlington National Cemetery’s page.
"Pete Hegseth removed Colin Powell’s name from a list of notable Americans, buried at Arlington National Cemetery," read a March 20 X post, referring to the former secretary of state and two-time Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient. One of PolitiFact’s text subscribers who saw the claim on social media and wondered "is that true?" suggested this as a fact-check.
An Arlington National Cemetery spokesperson told PolitiFact that about 40 names had been temporarily removed from its "Notable Graves" list, then were restored. The spokesperson said Powell’s remained on the website the entire time.
A couple of readers thought this was not the correct approach.
"They still had to remove Powell so this was True and after they put him back from pressure from people speaking out."
"You missed one on the Arlington/Colin Powell fact check. The article states General Powell was removed from the list of notable African-Americans. It never states he was removed from the list of notable Americans. And yet, you still declare it false, although it is completely factual."
Readers expressed appreciation for PolitiFact’s work during a tumultuous time
"Thank you for the quick response to the (January) Littlejohn lies…. Keep up the good work!"
"Your nonpartisan discussion of DOGE was really helpful and informative and should be shared with every media outlet in the country."
"Thank you for really digging into the issue of U.S. use of the Guantánamo Naval Station. During the 1990’s (and until my retirement) I studied Caribbean Sea migration and visited Guantánamo in 2012. I hope you’ll continue to report on this important issue. You basically added a bibliography to your article. In these times of fake news it is heartening to see a reporter providing that kind of background. ... I’m rambling on here but your article brought a flood of memories. Thanks for such a well written piece."
"I’ve become quite anxious about the state of American politics. Please keep up your good work. It helps us find the truth, which otherwise it’s difficult to see."
"Thank you so much for your vigilance - I cannot tell you, in this time, how much it is appreciated."
We appreciate our readers as well! Thank you, as always, for all your feedback and suggestions.
Our Sources
See in-line links for sources.
