Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Politics & government fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about politics & government. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

12,741 published reviews in this topic

Logically FactsPolitics & government

Ukraine President Zelenskyy purchased two yachts, ‘Lucky Me’ and ‘My Legacy,’ worth $75 million.

Publisher’s rating: False

Related reporting describes an October claim that Zelenskyy had bought two luxury yachts, valuing them at 75 million euros. The excerpt characterizes the posts making that allegation as false. It does not give the yachts’ names, identify their seller, or provide purchase records, so it does not substantiate the specific names or dollar amount in the claim. The source places the yacht story among a series of allegations about luxury purchases attributed to Zelenskyy. It says those stories followed a pattern in which allegations circulated through obscure journalists or purported whistleblowers and were amplified by websites and social-media accounts. The excerpt does not describe a yacht-specific investigation or show the evidence used to determine that this particular allegation was false.

Fact CrescendoPolitics & government

Claim: Modi mother not lived in this simple house while he is prime minister

Publisher’s rating: ஃபேக்ட் கிரஸண்டோ ரேட்டிங்: Misleading

Fact Crescendo investigated a social-media video of an old house that was being presented as the home where Narendra Modi’s mother lived while he was prime minister. The post, shared on Facebook on November 26, 2023, used the house to suggest that Modi’s mother lived simply, in contrast with other politicians. The review’s conclusion was narrower: the house in the video was not where his mother lived during his premiership. The review traced the video’s provenance by converting a frame to an image and using Google reverse-image search. It found the video on a YouTuber’s channel on December 24, 2022, identified as a house in Vadnagar, Gujarat. The review also said India Today and other outlets had filmed the same house and described it as the home where Modi lived with his brothers when he was young. That history supports identifying the building as Modi’s childhood home, not as his mother’s later residence. To assess where his mother lived, the review cited video evidence of Modi visiting her in Gandhinagar on his birthday while he was Gujarat chief minister. It reasoned that she had moved to Gandhinagar by then, and said videos of his later visits likewise showed that she did not live in the Vadnagar house after he became prime minister. The review states that she died in December 2022. Thus, the viral post’s implication about her residence during his premiership was misleading; the evidence does not establish that she never lived in the Vadnagar house at any point in her life.

dpaPolitics & government

Machtsgreep van de EU: Het Europees Parlement heeft gestemd voor het afschaffen van het nationale vetorecht.

Publisher’s rating: Nee, zo ver is het nog (lang) niet. Of het zo ver gaat komen, hangt bovendien van de lidstaten zelf af. Het Europees Parlement (EP) kan dergelijke hervormingen niet in zijn eentje doorvoeren.

The claim turns on what the European Parliament’s vote did. On 22 November 2023, Parliament approved a report proposing changes to the EU Treaties; the report included a proposal to replace unanimity in the Council of the EU on most policy areas with qualified-majority voting. Under unanimity, each of the 27 member states has an effective veto on many important decisions. The vote was 305 in favour, 276 against and 29 abstentions. It was a vote on proposals, not a change that itself removed national vetoes. The review explains that the more substantial proposals require amendments to the EU Treaties, which Parliament cannot make without the member states’ consent. The next steps described in the review involved the European Council deciding whether to move the proposals forward, followed, if it did, by a Convention and a conference of representatives of the member-state governments. Any agreed Treaty amendments would then have to be approved by every member state under its national constitutional rules before taking effect. So the vote did support seeking changes that could reduce the scope of national vetoes, but it did not itself abolish them. The review also records resistance among member states: it notes opposition to Treaty changes in Poland and statements by the Czech and Slovak prime ministers against limiting the veto. The outcome therefore still depended on decisions by the member states, rather than on Parliament’s vote alone.

Folha de S.PauloPolitics & government

Vídeo publicado nas redes sociais mostra o presidente do Supremo Tribunal Federal, Luís Roberto Barroso, sendo hostilizado por um grupo de pessoas, enquanto é atendido no guichê de um aeroporto. O grupo xinga, vaia e pede a saída do ministro do vôo. A publicação alega ainda, na sua legenda, que o ministro foi proibido de embarcar no avião por representar risco ao voo.

Publisher’s rating: Enganoso

The review concerns a post showing Supreme Court Justice Luís Roberto Barroso being verbally harassed by passengers at an airline counter in Miami. It says the footage was from January 2, 2023, when he was attempting to board a Gol flight to Brasília—not a recent incident, as the post’s omission of the date could make viewers think. The review describes the video as showing passengers’ verbal abuse directed at Barroso. The central allegation—that Barroso was prevented from flying because he posed a danger to the flight or its passengers—is contradicted by the explanation attributed to Gol. According to a statement the airline sent to CNN and Comprova, he did not board so that his safety could be protected. The review therefore distinguishes the documented reason for his not boarding from the post’s claim that he was considered a flight risk. The review also notes that the incident had been widely reported at the time. Its account supports the conclusion that the post uses real footage of the claimed event but omits its date and misrepresents why Barroso did not board.