Fact check: What were the most common topics of Trump's false claims during his 2nd term?

1. Why election claims remained the loudest drumbeat — and what fact-checkers found

Multiple fact-check reviews documented that claims revisiting the 2020 election and alleged fraud persisted as a leading subject of falsehoods, with repeated debunking of specific assertions at public events and in statements. Fact-checking coverage noted a pattern of recycled talking points about election results and process vulnerabilities that lack supporting evidence, and these claims were placed alongside other high-volume topics like the economy and immigration in frequency analyses ^[1]. Observers flagged the political utility of these narratives for mobilizing supporters and shaping media attention, while fact-checkers emphasized empirical refutation and absence of substantive new evidence.

2. Inflation and economic assertions: repeated, simplified, and often misleading

Reporting in September 2025 highlighted that inflation and economic claims were among Trump’s commonly debunked statements, often caricaturing complex macroeconomic dynamics with selective data or misleading timelines. Fact-checkers found frequent oversimplifications—attributing price changes to single causes or misstating statistical trends—which created an impression of widespread error in public statements ^[1]. Analysts noted that such claims can resonate politically even as independent data and economists point to multifactor explanations; the fact-checking emphasis was on the mismatch between rhetorical certainty and the nuanced economic record.

3. Immigration claims: volume, rhetoric, and the gap with evidence

Immigration constituted another major thematic area where false or misleading claims circulated repeatedly, with fact-checkers documenting assertions that exaggerated border chaos or misrepresented policy effects. The pattern combined vivid anecdotes and rhetorical framing that outpaced available data, prompting corrections that stressed measured indicators versus political rhetoric ^[1]. Critics argued these claims serve electoral and agenda-setting goals by focusing public attention on border security, while fact-checkers sought to reframe statements against border metrics and policy timelines.

4. Health claims focused on autism, vaccines, and pregnancy risks — debunked and persistent

A cluster of widely reported false claims concerned autism prevalence, vaccine schedules, and alleged links between Tylenol use in pregnancy and autism, with multiple fact-check pieces documenting inaccuracies in both figures and causal assertions ^{[2] [3]}. Reporters found repeated citations of exaggerated statistics—such as an asserted 400% rise in autism rates since 2000—that do not align with epidemiological analyses and regulatory guidance. Public-health experts and fact-checkers emphasized the risks of spreading unsubstantiated medical claims and the potential public-health consequences of undermining vaccine confidence.

5. The ‘medbed’ episode: fringe conspiracy meets presidential amplification

In late September 2025, reporting documented that Trump amplified a fringe “medbed” conspiracy theory promising miraculous cures and rejuvenation, including sharing and then deleting a post tied to an AI-generated video that depicted a surreal promise of universal cure-all devices ^{[4] [5] [6]}. Coverage traced the idea to QAnon-adjacent online communities and noted the rapid spread and subsequent removal of content, illustrating how fringe narratives can cross into the mainstream when amplified by high-profile accounts. Fact-checkers framed this as an instance where platform moderation and source verification collided with political communication.

6. The AI-video deletion: signal, noise, and platform responses

Forbes and other outlets reported that an AI-generated video featuring a fabricated message about medbeds was posted and then deleted from Trump’s channels, raising questions about content provenance and the use of synthetic media for political messaging ^{[5] [6]}. Journalists documented that the removal occurred within hours, suggesting platform or campaign action to limit association with overtly fringe material. Analysts cautioned that deleted content can still have downstream effects, and fact-checkers urged scrutiny of both the message and the mechanisms that allowed rapid amplification before removal.

7. Cross-cutting patterns: repetition, amplification, and political utility

Across topics, the reporting shows a consistent pattern of repetition, selective evidence, and amplification: contested claims were repeated in speeches and posts, picked up across sympathetic media or social networks, and sometimes corrected or removed after wider scrutiny ^{[1] [5]}. Fact-checkers emphasized that repetition increases perceived truthfulness regardless of accuracy, while commentators noted that quick deletions do not erase initial spread. The coverage balances public-interest reporting on misinformation harms with recognition that such narratives often serve coherent political aims.

8. What the sources agree on — and where agendas shape coverage

The fact-check and reporting corpus from late September 2025 uniformly identifies certain recurring falsehoods and a recent high-profile medbed incident, yet each source reflects perspectives and editorial priorities: mainstream fact-checks focused on empirical refutation of repeated claims about elections, economy, and health ^{[1] [2] [3]}, while business and investigative outlets contextualized the medbed AI episode and platform dynamics ^{[5] [6]}. Readers should note that coverage choices and emphases can reflect institutional agendas, but the underlying documented facts—repetition of debunked claims and an AI-generated medbed video that was deleted—are consistent across the sources cited.