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.

12,754 published reviews in this topic

The Washington Post - Noticias TelemundoPolitics & government

"Joe Biden intentó recortar Medicare y la Seguridad Social por décadas. Ahora está prometiendo que les dará tus beneficios a los inmigrantes ilegales"

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The review investigated a Trump campaign advertisement that said Biden had tried to cut Medicare and Social Security for decades and was now promising those benefits to undocumented immigrants. It found the ad misleadingly combined two different issues: an edited clip of Biden discussing past budget proposals, and claims about immigrants’ possible future eligibility for Social Security. The review says the ad cited a 2019 Fox News article, but that article concerned Biden’s support for allowing undocumented immigrants to access health services—not Social Security.

USA TODAYPolitics & government

Trump nominates Biden to the Supreme Court

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a social-media meme asserting that President Donald Trump would nominate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg. It further suggested that the nomination would force Democrats to address sexual-assault allegations against Biden. The review says the meme circulated on Instagram and used an image of Trump and Biden standing together, with Biden’s head apparently superimposed on another person’s body. The post’s wording invoked the 2018 confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh. (S1: “Trump plans to nominate Biden to fill the vacancy left by the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg so that any sexual assault allegations against the former vice president will come to light, according to the claim.”; “Biden's head appears to be superimposed over the body of whomever was originally pictured next to Trump.”; “The meme hearkens back to the 2018 confirmation hearings for Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh”) The review traced the meme to The Babylon Bee, identifying it as a copy of that site’s headline and describing the site as satirical. It also quoted the site’s description of itself as a satire site and identified the underlying item as a promotion for a fictional article. The article’s premise was that Trump had chosen Biden and that the choice would prompt Democrats to confront allegations against him. (S1: “The meme is an exact copy of a headline posted to the Instagram account for The Babylon Bee, a satire ‘news’ site.”; “The post, ‘Genius Trump Nominates Joe Biden To Supreme Court Forcing Dems To Accuse Him Of Sexual Assault,’ is a promotion for a fictional article posted to The Babylon Bee on Sept. 20, two days after Ginsburg's death.”) The review also compared the claim with the available information about Trump’s potential nominees. It reported that Biden was not on a list of 20 potential nominees released by Trump earlier that month, before Ginsburg’s death, and that two federal appeals court judges were then the leading candidates. Taken together, the article’s documented satirical origin and the absence of Biden from that list support the review’s conclusion that the meme did not report a genuine nomination. (S1: “Biden does not appear on a new list of 20 federal appeals and district court judges, senators and others released by the president earlier this month before Ginsburg's death as possible nominees to the Supreme Court, according to USA TODAY.”; “And two federal appeals court judges are the current front-runners in Trump's decisionmaking process in selecting a nominee, USA TODAY has reported.”)

The Washington Post - Noticias TelemundoPolitics & government

"Joe Biden intentó recortar Medicare y la Seguridad Social por décadas. Ahora está prometiendo que les dará tus beneficios a los inmigrantes ilegales"

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The review examined a Trump campaign advertisement that said Joe Biden had tried to cut Medicare and Social Security and was promising to give immigrants in the country illegally other people’s benefits. It found the ad misleadingly combined two separate issues: an edited video of Biden discussing a past budget proposal and claims about health coverage and eventual access to Social Security. The review says the Fox News article cited by the ad concerned access to health services, not Social Security: “Pero según ese artículo, Biden dijo que apoyaría permitir que los inmigrantes indocumentados accedan a servicios de salud.” It also notes that Biden supported allowing undocumented immigrants to buy insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace without subsidies. To assess the video, the review describes Biden’s proposal in the 1980s as a one-year freeze on all federal spending, including defense and social programs. It says the ad used a 1995 Senate video that removed the broader context. In the fuller remarks quoted by the review, Biden said he had sought to freeze “todos los gastos federales,” including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’ benefits. The review’s conclusion is that the ad’s presentation made a broad spending proposal look like an effort aimed specifically at cutting those programs. The review separately examined the claim that Biden promised to give undocumented immigrants “your” Social Security benefits. It says the ad did not identify the citizenship pathway that was central to its argument, and that the cited source addressed a different subject. The review explains that undocumented workers generally cannot access Social Security benefits, although they pay into the system; people who later become citizens or permanent residents may eventually qualify under the law. It also reports a limited qualification for DACA beneficiaries. The review concludes that the ad’s promise was not established and that its description of who would receive benefits was misleading.

Pagella PoliticaPolitics & government

«Non tutti sanno che dal punto di vista legale e giuridico, e non lo dico per spaventare perché ormai è acquisito, ma il Next generation Eu ancora non esiste» (min. 57:43)

Publisher’s rating: Vero

The claim concerns a legal-status statement by Italy’s economy minister, Roberto Gualtieri, at an event in Assisi. The review reports that he said at 57:43 that Next Generation EU did not yet exist “from a legal and juridical point of view.” Its conclusion is about whether the fund had become legally established—not whether European leaders had agreed to create it or whether work to implement it was underway. The review says the European Council had agreed to the fund on 21 July, but that it had not yet been set down in EU law: “non è ancora stato scritto nero su bianco nelle leggi europee.” That distinction is central to the assessment. The review explains that the agreement concerned a €750 billion recovery fund, financed through common European debt, and that the name “Recovery fund” is used in Italy for either Next Generation EU as a whole or, more narrowly, its largest component, the Recovery and Resilience Facility. It therefore treats Gualtieri’s wording as referring to a project agreed in principle but not yet legally in force, rather than as a denial that an agreement existed. The article explicitly says that this did not mean no progress had been made since July. The review also describes steps already taken toward implementation. It reports that the European Commission published guidance on 17 September for member states preparing plans to access the Recovery and Resilience Facility, while negotiations continued over the EU’s 2021–2027 budget and the resources needed to finance the fund. It says the Commission expected the fund to become legally operational in January 2021 and that plans would be due by the end of April 2021, with drafts possible from 15 October. These details provide the relevant qualification: the fund was advancing institutionally, but the review says it was not yet legally established.

FACTLYPolitics & government

Video of PM Modi celebrating his birthday with industrialists

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a video said to show Prime Minister Narendra Modi celebrating his birthday with industrialists. FACTLY reports that the video instead shows Modi with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a visit to Israel. The review says the two men were drinking water filtered by a mobile water-filtration plant, not celebrating a birthday with industrialists. To check the video’s provenance, the review describes searching the internet with keywords and finding a similar video posted by ANI News Official on YouTube in July 2017. ANI’s description identified the scene as a demonstration at Dor beach in Israel’s Haifa and said Netanyahu accompanied Modi. The review also points to photographs posted by ANI and a similar video tweeted by Netanyahu on 6 July 2017. The reported event date and location contradict the birthday framing: the review notes that Modi’s birthday is in September, while the video was taken in July 2017. On the evidence described, the footage is from a water-filtration demonstration during Modi’s Israel visit, rather than a birthday gathering with industrialists.

Deutsche Presse-AgenturPolitics & government

Die Vergangenheit der Vorsitzenden der Amadeu-Antonio-Stiftung, Anetta Kahane, ist immer wieder Gegenstand von Debatten. Kritikpunkt ist insbesondere ihre Tätigkeit als Inoffizielle Mitarbeiterin (IM) des Ministeriums für Staatssicherheit der DDR. In diesem Zusammenhang kursiert auch ein Foto (hier archiviert), das sie in einer entsprechenden Uniform zeigen soll.

Publisher’s rating: Es handelt sich um eine Fotomontage.

The review examined a Facebook image said to show Anetta Kahane in an East German uniform. It found that the image was a composite: Kahane’s portrait had been combined with a photograph of a National People’s Army (NVA) general colonel. The image therefore does not show Kahane wearing the uniform, despite the post’s presentation of it as a photograph of her in uniform. [S1: “Das auf Facebook verbreitete Foto soll Kahane in DDR-Uniform zeigen. Tatsächlich aber handelt es sich um eine Montage aus einem Porträtfoto Kahanes und der Aufnahme eines Generaloberst der Nationalen Volksarmee (NVA).”] The review separately addresses the background invoked in discussion of the image. Kahane acknowledged that she was an informant for East Germany’s state security service from 1974 to 1982; historians disagree about the extent of her activity. That background does not establish that the circulated image is authentic. [S1: “Dass sie von 1974 bis 1982 IM der DDR-Staatssicherheit war, räumt sie selbst ein. Unter Historikern ist jedoch umstritten, wie umfangreich ihre Tätigkeit war.”] The post also claimed that Kahane had belonged to the former East German communist party, the SED. The review says there is no historical evidence for that claim and notes that party membership was not a prerequisite for serving as an informant. [S1: “Irreführend in dem Zusammenhang ist zudem die in dem Post verbreitete Behauptung, Kahane sei «in der ehemaligen ostdeutschen Kommunistischen Partei (SED)» gewesen. Dafür gibt es keinerlei historischen Beleg - es war auch nicht Voraussetzung, um als IM tätig zu sein.”]