Which fact-checking organizations have tracked Trump's post-presidency false claims?

1. FactCheck.org and PolitiFact — the steady pair of nonprofit verifiers

FactCheck.org has an ongoing archive devoted to Donald Trump that documents recurring falsehoods and evaluates specific claims from his statements and administration actions, signaling sustained post‑presidential coverage ^{[1] [9]}, while PolitiFact maintains a searchable list of false rulings for Trump on its Truth‑O‑Meter and republishes fact‑checks through partner outlets such as PBS, underscoring its active role in tracking his post‑presidency claims ^{[2] [10] [11]}.

2. National newsrooms with fact‑check desks — Times, Post, CNN, PBS, ABC

Major newsroom fact‑check units have repeatedly evaluated Trump’s statements since he left office: The New York Times published a roundup of falsehoods from his first year back in office ^[3], The Washington Post has been credited with comprehensive compilations of his false or misleading statements across terms (as documented in background material) ^[4], and cable and public broadcasters including CNN, PBS NewsHour and ABC News have issued targeted fact‑checks of prime‑time addresses, press briefings and election‑related claims ^{[5] [6] [7]}.

3. Independent trackers and thematic projects

Beyond traditional fact‑checkers, specialized trackers and watchdog projects have also catalogued Trump’s post‑presidential actions and statements: the Trump Action Tracker documents actions and rhetoric it deems authoritarian and keeps an ongoing tally since January 2025 ^[12], and state or advocacy sites periodically compile claim lists tied to policy fights — these projects often blend fact‑checking with advocacy and monitoring functions ^[12].

4. Academic and AI‑assisted fact‑checking experiments

Scholars and technologists have tested AI models and research platforms on Trump’s repeated assertions to assess automated fact‑checking performance, as in a Yale Insights piece that ran multiple AI models against frequently repeated claims to evaluate veracity and model consistency — an indicator that academic labs and AI tools are part of the broader ecosystem monitoring his claims ^[8].

5. What they track and how — scope and methods

These organizations differ in emphasis: FactCheck.org and PolitiFact typically evaluate discrete statements against public records and statistics and publish verdicts ^{[1] [2]}, newsroom desks combine live‑event fact‑checking with contextual enterprise reporting for big addresses or policy claims ^{[6] [5] [3]}, while trackers like Trump Action Tracker focus on cataloging patterns of behavior and rhetoric with a mission‑driven framing ^[12]; AI and academic projects stress methodological experiments rather than ongoing public rulings ^[8].

6. Caveats, agendas and limitations in the landscape

Readers should note differing missions and potential biases: nonprofit fact‑checkers emphasize independence but may be perceived as partisan; mainstream newsrooms balance speed and depth and sometimes republish partner fact‑checks ^{[11] [10]}, while advocacy trackers explicitly aim to document threats to democracy and therefore blend monitoring with normative aims ^[12]. Reporting available in these sources does not catalog every individual organization that has ever checked Trump’s post‑presidential claims, so this summary is limited to entities explicitly documented in the supplied reporting ^{[1] [3] [6] [2] [4] [8] [5] [7] [12]}.

Conclusion

A constellation of nonprofit fact‑checkers (FactCheck.org, PolitiFact), legacy newsroom teams (The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, PBS, ABC) and specialized trackers and academic projects have all actively tracked Donald Trump’s post‑presidential falsehoods, each with distinct methods, emphases and implicit agendas; the sources cited here document that plural ecosystem but do not exhaust every verifier that may have examined his claims ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [12] [8]}.