Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck) header
Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck) profile picture

Fact checking of a different stripe, watchdog of fact checkers

Tampa Bay
Joined October 2012
Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)Photo by Bryan W. White (@ZebraFactCheck)
With my focus in recent years on correcting the false popular narrative about the Brooks Brothers riot, I find it fascinating how often people will block me immediately for simply stating the truth. Bear in mind this has happened dozens of times before I decided to start documenting it.
2
2
235
Dear @Google, this is not an acceptable search result using Google Advanced search restricted to the domain politifact.com/ None of the results were restricted to that domain.
23
Bryan W. White retweeted
Replying to @QuirkyRides
Art deco was the peak of human deign
4
14
1
638
11,839
Bryan W. White retweeted
The Electoral College reflects the fact that the US is a republic. The Founders wanted a constitutional system based on the consent of the governed, but they wanted filtering mechanisms so that the will of the people would be channeled towards the public good. And they wanted the role of the states respected. The EC also guarantees that in an “extended republic” like the US, a candidate cannot just run up the score in one region of the country. In our time, the EC serves to produce a clearer and more decisive winner (see, eg, Bill Clinton winning 43% of the popular vote but a strong majority in the EC) and focuses election administration in individual states, which reduces complexity in a close race. We should be doing more to bolster federalism and the role states play, not further weaken them. There is no reason to change the Electoral College.
678
3,139
141
14,145
232,732
Bryan W. White retweeted
There is no Electoral College problem. It works exactly as intended. The "problem" is that people have been convinced that direct democracy is preferable.
We can solve the Electoral College problem by uncapping the House. No Constitutional Amendment needed. Right size the House (should be about 800 members) and we won’t have a popular vote/EC split maybe ever. Oh, and the House will actually be “the people’s House” again.
284
479
37
3,899
95,463
This is what it's like explaining the truth about the Brooks Brothers riot to people on Twitter/X/twiX
24
What could have prompted the great Alexander B. Howard to block me? 🤔 Just like the rest.😄 teapawt.net/ZebraFactCheck/status/…
You're misinformed about the Brooks Brothers riot, *if* it stopped a recount, it was the 19th floor recount that illegally excluded most public observers. You bet I can prove it. The media reported enough true to expose the false.
2
1
25
This poor creature had the unenviable task of defending her claim that Marsha Blackburn, Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and John Roberts were involved in the Brooks Brothers riot.
27
Went back in the PolitiFact archives and found a case where PolitiFact essentially used Buzzfeed to do its fact check based on information not available to the public and apparently not available to @PolitiFact, either.
1
40
"Don’t worry, we’ve notified someone that this page is missing." Hmm.
1
19
I guess the alert goes to the IT team, and they get around to it when they get around to it. web.archive.org/web/20261113…
14
Bryan W. White retweeted
The Electoral College was basically a compromise. The Founders wanted the president chosen with the people’s support, but they didn’t want a straight national popular vote or to just hand the decision to Congress. At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, they talked for months about how to pick a president. A direct popular vote worried them. Bigger states would almost always win. A lot of voters wouldn’t really know candidates from other parts of the country. And someone who was just good at stirring people up in one area could end up winning. Letting Congress pick the president worried them even more. The president would end up depending on Congress, which goes against the idea of keeping the branches separate. It also opened the door to backroom deals, corruption, or other countries trying to influence the choice. So they settled on the Electoral College. Each state gets electors equal to its number of House seats plus its two senators. Those electors cast the actual votes for president. You need a majority to win. If no one gets it, the House decides, and each state gets one vote. The states get to decide how they pick their electors. This setup treated the country as a union of states instead of one giant population. It gave smaller states more of a voice, kept the president from being controlled by Congress, and still let the people’s choice matter. Alexander Hamilton explained it in Federalist 68. He said the people’s voice still counts because they choose the electors. The electors would be people who could actually study the candidates and make a careful choice. Meeting in their own states (instead of all in one place) would make it harder for chaos, bribery, or foreign influence to take over. And the president would still depend on the people, not Congress, to stay in office. Hamilton also pointed out that being good at “the little arts of popularity” might get someone ahead in one state, but it would take real ability and character to win the confidence of the whole country. He thought the system made it very likely only someone highly qualified would end up as president. That’s the idea they were going for: a capable president with support across the country, protection for smaller states, and an executive that stayed independent. Things changed later with political parties and the winner-take-all system most states use now, but the basic structure is still what the Constitution set up. The Electoral College must be protected at all costs— it’s common sense in a country filled with lunatics.
417
1,399
136
5,934
367,953
Bryan W. White retweeted
Why is everyone saying the ALGAE is back at the Lincoln Reflecting Pool? I went to fact check.
25
99
2
695
13,648
Bryan W. White retweeted
Competitive bidding from private sector companies saves money, but not in the leftist fantasy world.
2
2
432
Bryan W. White retweeted
The problem is that the unions protect bad schools and bad teachers, and the party protects the unions. In many cities, it's almost impossible to fire a teacher. #RTOvertime #ChalkboardMafia
449
1,180
113
8,572
321,104
Bryan W. White retweeted
Pete Buttigieg claims that the Electoral College “makes no sense” and should be abolished because it is a remnant of “some very arcane, parochial politics in the 1770s.” IN FACT, the Electoral College is a safeguard against mobocracy, which the authors of the Constitution rejected because it allows the majority to easily violate the rights of the minority. Here are the specifics: • Early during the convention at which the U.S. Constitution was written, James Madison, the father of the Constitution and primary author of the Bill of Rights, declared that the new government they were creating must provide “more effectually for the security of private rights and the steady dispensation of Justice.” • He then stressed that violations of these ideals “had more perhaps than any thing else, produced this convention.” • Madison then singled out “democracy” as the cause of those abuses and pointed out that all societies are “divided into different Sects, Factions, and interests,” and “where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger.” • Continuing, he stated that this is “verified by the histories of every country” and is the cause of slavery, “the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.” • Thus, Madison emphasized that it was the duty of the Convention to “frame a republican system” of government that would better “guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part.” • Elaborating on that point, Madison stated that the “only defense against the inconveniencies of democracy consistent with the democratic form of government” is to “divide the community into so great a number of interests and parties, that in the first place a majority will not be likely at the same moment to have a common interest separate from that of the whole or of the minority; and in the second place, that in case they should have such an interest, they may not be apt to unite in the pursuit of it.” • Other delegates to the Convention concurred, like Edmund Randolph of Virginia, who observed “that the general object was to provide a cure for the evils under which the U.S. labored; that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.” • For the purpose of curbing such evils, Madison and the other framers of the Constitution developed a system of checks and balances on the powers of the government that they formed, such as the separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, the Constitutional amendment process, the Bill of Rights, and the Electoral College. • The Electoral College was designed to prevent heavily populated areas from dominating the election for president. As shown in the electoral precinct map from Washington State University professor Ryne Rohla, the vast majority of America’s communities voted for Donald Trump in 2016. Yet Hillary Clinton’s popular vote count was higher, mainly due to support in big cities. • In essays explaining the Constitution’s protections against mob rule and government power, Madison wrote, “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” • Those principles produced the U.S. Constitution, which is the world’s longest-standing written constitution and an exemplar for many other countries that have copied its provisions into their constitutions. Hyperlinks to the sources of all the facts above are available at justfactsdaily.com/in-fact/n…
406
696
107
1,951
1,010,352
Bryan W. White retweeted
The complete section from @DontTrustVerfy about this subject is available on the book’s Substack. donttrustverify.substack.com…
3
1
8
774
Bryan W. White retweeted
Just wrapped up 40+ minutes with President Trump which will play in its entirety in hours one and two of today’s program. Lots of news so tune in or @WatchSalemNews. @radioblogger will post transcript at 5 PM at the same time the interview posts at my YouTube channel.
3
22
1
190
8,817
Bryan W. White retweeted
It was explained to me by my parents who defected from Hungary with nothing.
You don’t hate socialism. You hate the version that was explained to you by someone who owns 4 houses and 3 yachts
159
1,305
21
13,957
217,828
Bryan W. White retweeted
New York Times reporter Fox Butterfield amused conservative crime analysts in the late 1990s and early 2000s by writing articles under headlines such as: “Crime Keeps on Falling, but Prisons Keep on Filling.” “Prison Population Growing Although Crime Rate Drops.” “Number in Prison Grows Despite Crime Reduction.” To Butterfield, a simultaneous crime drop and incarceration increase was a paradox. The possibility that locking up criminals would help lower crime was all but inconceivable. The liberal policy world is still in the grips of what become known as the Butterfield Fallacy. An article this week in Stateline, a left-leaning news website, puzzles over the fact that low-level arrests are rising “despite national crime declines.” Such contrasting trend lines are precisely what Broken Windows theory predicts. Criminals are polymorphous offenders; if they break one law, they will likely break others as well. Because they commit low-level offenses more frequently than homicide, robbery, and other felonies, focusing on misdemeanor crime is an efficient way to reduce all crime, besides providing the orderly streets that the public cares the most about. The study on which Stateline reports focused on vagrancy, drug possession, and immigration arrests. The latter nearly tripled from 2024 to 2025. Vagrant encampments are a hotbed of crime. They also signal to other would-be criminals that no one is in control of the streets. Dismantling them accomplishes numerous salutary goals. Arrests for drug possession are almost always a proxy for street drug trafficking. The latter routinely leads to drive-by shootings. I had been skeptical of Trump’s claims to own the felony crime drop but the data on immigration arrests and the fall in index crime suggest a credible connection. As newly emboldened Democrats seek to further emasculate immigration enforcement and to fortify sanctuary jurisdictions against the rule of law, we can expect a natural experiment testing that connection. Stateline and the anti-incarceration group that did the misdemeanor study are already playing the race card, warning that increases in enforcement will widen racial disparities in the criminal justice system. This, too, is a harbinger of the discourse under an increasingly Democratic-run polity. Those racial disparities reflect different rates of offending and different rates of 911 calls for service. The disparities that should be the focus of law enforcement are those in victimization rates, something that progressives almost universally refuse to acknowledge. That massive victimization gap will also widen if enforcement is cut back, but at least the police won’t be accosting black criminals.
33
162
16
812
28,045