Methodology

How entries get in, how claims get scored, and what each status means.

Inclusion rules

Every pattern page carries a written inclusion rule, displayed on the page, and that rule is applied exhaustively. Curation is itself an argument, so completeness is the defense against it. A series that collects only the instances that make a point is not evidence of a pattern; a series that collects every instance the rule names is.

Instances where a claim held are published with the same prominence as instances where it did not. A scorecard with honest successes on it is the credibility of the whole site.

Where the editor would otherwise be tempted to make a generalization, that generalization becomes a series with a rule and a count instead.

Checkpoints

Each series carries a checkpoint table recording status at 14 days, at 90 days, and as of the last site update. Every checkpoint cell is separately sourced. Open series are revisited quarterly and their checkpoints updated.

Each series also carries a written outcome standard: what counts as holding, what counts as partial, what counts as failed, and the type of evidence required for each. The standard is written before the outcomes are scored.

Claim status

• Verified. Primary source in hand and archived.
• Verified modified. The popular version of the claim was imprecise. The entry states the precise verified version instead.
• Disputed. Credible sources conflict. The entry presents both, side by side, with citations.
• Pending. In the intake queue. Pending entries do not appear on this site.

Legal status

Legal characterizations run in three tiers and are never blended.

• Adjudicated. A court has ruled. The entry cites case, court, date, and holding. This is a fact and is stated as one.
• Alleged. A suit, referral, or charge claims illegality and no ruling exists. The entry says so in those terms and cites the docket.
• Neither. If a matter is not adjudicated and not alleged with a citation, the entry does not characterize its legality at all.

There is no tier for the editor's own assessment of legality, and no such assessment appears anywhere on this site.

Sources and archives

Tier 1 sources are primary: the subject's own posts, official transcripts, court filings, the Federal Register, the Department of Justice disclosures library, filings with the Office of Government Ethics, congressional records, and C-SPAN. Tier 2 sources are wire services for event facts and named-outlet reporting with a specific article link, with video or transcript preferred over paraphrase.

Social media threads, aggregators, anonymous claims, and screenshots without provenance are not acceptable as a sole source.

For every source, without exception: the document or capture is downloaded and retained, an archive snapshot is taken at intake and its URL recorded, and the document identifier is recorded. The identifier is the citation. The URL is only a way to resolve it. Link integrity is swept quarterly, and dead links have their archive URL promoted.

Claims measured against the record

Where a statement is set against what followed, four requirements apply before it is published.

1. Provenance. The original post URL, post identifier, and timestamp, plus an archive snapshot captured at intake. A screenshot is display. The archive is the citation.
2. Temporal discipline. The record side distinguishes the facts as they stood when the statement was made from what emerged afterward. A claim that was false when made and a prediction that later failed are different findings and are labeled as such.
3. The steelman test. Before publication the most charitable reading of the statement is written out. If the contrast survives that reading, it publishes. If it only works against an uncharitable reading, it is cut.
4. Completeness. Statements inside a series follow that series inclusion rule, including the instances where the claim held.

Records released by the government

Entries drawn from released document collections cite only officially released material: the Department of Justice disclosures library, court filings with case numbers, and congressional releases. Each entry characterizes the document rather than its implication, stating what the document is, who released it, when, and what it says. Being named in a released file is not evidence of wrongdoing, and entries do not imply that it is. Uncorroborated allegations are labeled uncorroborated, and any denial on the record is included in the entry.

What is excluded

• Entries sourced only to social media commentary or aggregators.
• Psychological, medical, or motive claims about any person.