About This Project

A court, regulatory body, or government authority has issued a final judgment, conviction, settlement carrying factual admissions, or binding order. The facts were tested through an adversarial process and the entry cites the specific ruling.

Criminal convictions, civil judgments including default judgments, consent decrees, regulatory settlements, court-ordered dissolutions and penalties, and findings of fact by a judge after trial all qualify.

These facts are not reasonably disputable. A court weighed the evidence and ruled.

A prosecutor, congressional committee, inspector general, or regulatory agency has brought charges, published findings, or completed an official investigation, and the matter has not reached final adjudication. That absence often has nothing to do with the strength of the evidence: cases end on procedural grounds, on immunity, or in plea deals by co-defendants.

Indictments qualify, including those later dismissed procedurally, as do congressional findings, inspector general reports, regulatory conclusions, and special counsel reports.

A body with investigative authority found enough to act. Read the outcome and the evidence as separate questions.

The action or statement is captured in a verifiable primary record and no legal proceeding has adjudicated it. At least one document or recording establishes the claim directly, and the entry links to it wherever the source permits.

Video and audio from C-SPAN, press conferences, rallies, and leaked recordings qualify, as do sworn depositions, financial disclosures and tax filings, executive orders, pardons, official communications, corporate and SEC filings, and Trump's own posts, archived so they survive deletion.

You can check this yourself against the cited source. What the evidence means may be arguable; that it exists is not.

A news organization with editorial review has documented the matter, corroborated across multiple sources, and the underlying evidence is not publicly available for independent verification. Those organizations carry legal exposure for defamation and negligence, which is an institutional check, though a weaker one than a court record.

Investigations from the Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and the Associated Press qualify, along with book-length work by credentialed journalists and reporting corroborated across independent outlets. The entry names the outlet and describes the sourcing.

This is professional journalism under editorial scrutiny, and you cannot check its primary evidence directly. Weigh it accordingly.

The judgment concerns ethics, democratic norms, standards of presidential conduct, or basic decency. The underlying facts are documented at one of the tiers above; the characterization of them is argued.

Every interpretive entry carries its factual basis at Tier 1 through 4, attributes the reading to its source, and states the counterargument.

This is where the author's perspective enters. The facts are cited and the meaning is argued, and reasonable people will disagree about the second without disputing the first.