Asking AI Services: Please fact check the transcript of the Musk-Trump Cabinet Meeting and list all statements that are factually incorrect. "A decrease of more than 100% is not possible." 😂

Asking AI Services: Please fact check the transcript of the Musk-Trump Cabinet Meeting and list all statements that are factually incorrect.

Grok’s answer:
Below is a fact-checking analysis of the transcript from the Musk-Trump Cabinet Meeting based on the provided text and my current knowledge as of February 27, 2025. Since I cannot perform real-time web searches for this task, I will rely on my existing knowledge to identify statements that are factually incorrect or questionable. I’ll list each inaccurate statement with an explanation of why it’s incorrect, focusing on claims that can be reasonably verified with general knowledge or logical inconsistencies in the text. Note that some statements may be speculative or exaggerated rather than outright false, and I’ll flag those accordingly.

Factually Incorrect Statements

1. Claim (Page 1, 1:00): "The previous administration put us in a very bad position but we've been able to make a deal where we're going to get our money back and we're going to get a lot of money in the future."

   • Issue: This statement implies that the U.S. spent money on Ukraine under the Biden administration without any repayment mechanism, and that a new deal under Trump will recover this. In reality, U.S. aid to Ukraine (approximately $175 billion by late 2024 under Biden) has largely been in the form of military aid, grants, and loans, not investments expecting direct repayment. While Trump mentions a deal with Ukraine involving rare earth minerals (later elaborated), there’s no evidence as of early 2025 that such a deal has been finalized to "get our money back" from past aid, making this claim speculative or misleading without further substantiation.

2. Claim (Page 4, 13:47): "We think there are a number of people under government payroll who are uh dead which is probably why they can't respond."

   • Issue: Elon Musk suggests that a significant number of federal employees on the payroll might be deceased, based on non-responses to an email. While fraud (e.g., payments to deceased individuals) has occurred historically in programs like Social Security, there’s no evidence of widespread payroll fraud involving dead federal employees on this scale. The U.S. federal workforce is approximately 2.1 million civilians (excluding postal workers), and such a claim would require substantial documentation, which is not provided. This appears exaggerated or speculative.

3. Claim (Page 6, 20:42): "You have so many people in Social Security where uh if you believe it they're 200 years old."

   • Issue: Trump claims that Social Security is sending checks to people who are 200 years old, implying rampant fraud. While fraud involving payments to deceased beneficiaries does occur (estimated at $31 million annually by the SSA Inspector General in recent years), the idea of "200-year-olds" receiving checks is a hyperbolic exaggeration. The oldest verified living people are around 115-120 years old, and systemic errors are not at this extreme level.

4. Claim (Page 8, 31:17): "Biden has spent $350 billion without any chance of getting it back now we're going to be getting all of that money back plus a lot more."

   • Issue: The figure of $350 billion for Ukraine aid under Biden is inflated. By late 2024, total U.S. aid to Ukraine was around $175 billion, including military, humanitarian, and economic support. The claim that Biden’s aid had "no chance of getting it back" ignores that some aid was loans, though most was not repayable. The assertion that Trump’s administration will recover "all of that money back plus a lot more" lacks evidence as of February 2025, especially without a finalized deal, making it factually unsupported.

5. Claim (Page 8, 31:49): "Europe spent $100 billion now does anybody really think that's fair but then we find out a little while ago not so long ago a few months ago I found out that the money they spent they get back but the money we spent we don't get back."

   • Issue: Trump claims the EU spent $100 billion on Ukraine and gets it back, while the U.S. does not. EU aid to Ukraine by late 2024 was around €133 billion (approximately $140 billion USD), mostly grants and loans, not repayable in full. The U.S. aid (~$175 billion) is similarly structured, with some loans but mostly grants. There’s no evidence that EU aid is universally repaid while U.S. aid is not—both are largely non-repayable support. This is factually incorrect and misrepresents the nature of international aid.

6. Claim (Page 9, 34:48): "When I left we had no wars we had defeated Isis totally we had no inflation we didn't have the Afghanistan withdrawal."

   • Issue: Multiple inaccuracies:

     • "No wars": While no new major wars began during Trump’s first term (2017-2021), the U.S. was engaged in ongoing conflicts, including in Afghanistan and against ISIS.

     • "Defeated ISIS totally": ISIS’s territorial caliphate was largely dismantled by 2019, but the group persisted as a terrorist threat, with attacks continuing globally. "Totally defeated" overstates the reality.

     • "No inflation": Inflation was low (averaging 1.9% annually), but not zero, as implied.

     • "Didn’t have the Afghanistan withdrawal": True in timing (it occurred in 2021 under Biden), but Trump negotiated the 2020 Doha Agreement, setting the stage for withdrawal, so claiming no involvement is misleading.

7. Claim (Page 9, 35:00): "I think that's one of the reasons that President Putin looked at that he said wow these guys are a paper tiger."

   • Issue: This attributes Russia’s 2022 Ukraine invasion directly to the 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal. While some analysts suggest U.S. credibility was weakened, there’s no direct evidence Putin’s decision hinged on this event alone. Russia’s annexation of Crimea (2014) and buildup predated it, driven by broader geopolitical goals. This is speculative, not factual.

8. Claim (Page 11, 40:49): "We give billions of dollars to Afghanistan nobody knows that nobody knew that."

   • Issue: U.S. aid to Afghanistan is well-documented, totaling over $146 billion from 2001-2021, mostly for reconstruction and military support. Post-2021, aid dropped sharply (e.g., $3.5 billion in frozen assets), with humanitarian aid in the low billions. The claim that "nobody knows" is false—Congress and the public have tracked this for decades.

9. Claim (Page 11, 42:46): "Afghanistan is one of the biggest sellers of military equipment in the world you know why they're selling the equipment that we left."

   • Issue: The U.S. left behind $7 billion in equipment after the 2021 withdrawal, much of it captured by the Taliban. There’s no evidence Afghanistan has become "one of the biggest sellers" globally. Arms sales are dominated by countries like the U.S., Russia, and China. This is an exaggeration without substantiation.

10. Claim (Page 13, 49:00): "If we don’t support them [Canada] they don’t subsist as a nation."

    • Issue: Trump claims Canada’s survival depends on U.S. subsidies ($200 billion annually). Canada’s GDP is $2.1 trillion USD, and while it relies heavily on U.S. trade (75% of exports), it’s a sovereign nation with a robust economy. The $200 billion figure lacks context—U.S.-Canada trade imbalances are far smaller (e.g., $28 billion deficit in 2023). This is hyperbolic and incorrect.

11. Claim (Page 13, 50:00): "European Union was formed in order to screw the United States."

    • Issue: The EU’s origins (1950s European Coal and Steel Community, 1993 Maastricht Treaty) were about European integration and peace, not targeting the U.S. While trade disputes exist, the EU’s purpose was not to "screw" the U.S. This is a misrepresentation of history.

12. Claim (Page 17, 1:07:41): "The wartime aid from the European Union had been given in the form of a loan something President Macron of France fact-checked him on in real time earlier this week."

    • Issue: Trump’s claim (Page 8) that EU aid to Ukraine is repayable loans is incorrect, as noted by the correspondent. Most EU aid (€133 billion by 2024) is grants or guarantees, not fully repayable loans. Macron’s "real-time fact-check" aligns with this, contradicting Trump’s assertion.

Notes on Verification

• Some claims (e.g., future policy outcomes like the "Trump Gold Card" or Ukraine deal specifics) are speculative and cannot be fact-checked yet due to lack of implementation details as of February 27, 2025.

• Hyperbolic statements (e.g., "best cabinet ever," "disgusting" government) are opinions, not verifiable facts, and thus not listed.

• Minor discrepancies (e.g., exact aid figures fluctuating slightly) are adjusted based on the most reliable estimates available to me.

ChatGPT-4o’s answer:
To fact-check the Musk-Trump Cabinet Meeting transcript, I'll analyze the claims made in the document and verify their accuracy against reliable sources. I will provide a list of factually incorrect or misleading statements and explain why they are incorrect.

I'll now begin verifying these statements and compiling a list of inaccuracies.

After reviewing the transcript of the Musk-Trump Cabinet Meeting held on February 26, 2025, several statements have been identified as factually incorrect or misleading:

1. Claim: Elon Musk stated that without his cost-cutting measures, the United States would face bankruptcy.

   Fact-Check: While Musk emphasized the urgency of implementing cost-cutting measures to prevent national bankruptcy, there is no concrete evidence to suggest that the U.S. was on the brink of bankruptcy prior to these initiatives. The U.S. has a substantial national debt, but the risk of immediate bankruptcy is not supported by financial analyses.

   PBS

2. Claim: Musk mentioned that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had inadvertently canceled an Ebola prevention program, which was quickly restored.

   Fact-Check: Musk admitted that DOGE briefly cut Ebola prevention funding due to an administrative error. However, reports indicate that aid groups disputed the restoration of funding, noting that it had not been reinstated amid an Ebola outbreak in Africa.

   News.com.au

3. Claim: President Trump asserted that all Cabinet members were "extremely happy" with Musk's role and efforts.

   Fact-Check: While there was applause during the meeting, reports suggest that some Cabinet members had reservations about Musk's methods. The meeting did not clarify Musk's actual authority within the administration or over federal employees compared to their direct supervisors.

   News.com.au

4. Claim: Musk claimed that his efforts could save the government $1 trillion.

   Fact-Check: Musk has proposed ambitious goals to reduce federal spending by up to $2 trillion by cutting waste and downsizing the federal workforce. However, experts have questioned the feasibility of achieving such significant savings, and no detailed plan has been provided to substantiate this claim.

   Wikipedia

5. Claim: Musk stated that the email sent to federal employees was a "pulse check review" to determine if they had a pulse and two neurons.

   Fact-Check: The email in question required federal employees to justify their previous week's work or face termination. This directive led to confusion and protests from unions, indicating that it was perceived as a performance review rather than a simple check of engagement.

   The Times

6. Claim: Musk suggested that DOGE had uncovered widespread fraud and corruption within the government.

   Fact-Check: During the early weeks of DOGE's operations, Musk and President Trump claimed to have discovered numerous cases of fraud and corruption. However, they provided little to no evidence to support these allegations, and some issues they highlighted had been identified in previous years.

   Wikipedia

These discrepancies highlight the importance of critically evaluating statements made during high-profile meetings and cross-referencing them with reliable sources to ensure accuracy.

Claude’s answer:
Based on my review of the transcript, here are the factually incorrect statements:

1. "I got elected with a tremendous vote winning every swing state winning the popular vote" - Trump did not win the popular vote in the 2024 election; he won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote to Kamala Harris.

2. "I think it was 2,800 to 500 28 800 counties to 500 counties" - This county count is inaccurate. In both 2020 and 2024, Trump won approximately 2,500 counties, not 2,800.

3. "We lose 300,000 people a year to fentanyl" - This significantly overstates fentanyl deaths. The CDC reported about 75,000 deaths involving synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) in 2022, not 300,000.

4. Claims that the Biden administration gave $350 billion to Ukraine - The actual amount of U.S. aid to Ukraine under Biden was approximately $75 billion, not $350 billion.

5. "We're first in course per pupil" regarding education spending - While the U.S. spends more than average, it is not the highest per-pupil spender among developed nations.

6. "The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States" - The European Union was formed primarily for European economic and political integration, not to disadvantage the United States.

7. "When they ask for my security guarantees, Europe will have to do that" - This contradicts established NATO arrangements where the U.S. has treaty obligations for European security.

8. "The Americans spend $200 billion a year in subsidies to Canada" - This figure is not supported by economic data regarding U.S.-Canada relations.

9. Claims that CBS inserted an entirely different answer for Kamala Harris - While there may have been editing issues, this characterization of CBS deliberately fabricating answers is not substantiated.

Perplexity’s answer:
Okay, I've reviewed the transcript of the provided document, which appears to be a transcript of a Cabinet meeting between President Trump and Elon Musk. Here's a breakdown of potentially factually incorrect statements, keeping in mind that some statements are subjective or matters of opinion:

Potentially Factually Incorrect Statements:

• 0:14 - "we're doing very well with Russia Ukraine president zalinski is going to be coming on Friday that's now confirmed and we're going to be signing an agreement which will be a very big agreement" - This statement is difficult to verify without knowing the exact date of the meeting. However, the claim of a "very big agreement" should be verified against official records of any agreements signed.

• 3:44 - "in just over one month illegal border crossings have plummeted by numbers that nobody's actually ever seen before it's much more than 100%" - A decrease of more than 100% is not possible. It can not be less than zero.

• 5:13 - "whether it's this year or next year I think we'll be very close to balancing budgets" - This is a projection, but it should be checked against actual budget figures for the years in question to determine its accuracy.

• 7:13 - "I got elected with a tremendous vote winning every swing state winning the popular vote winning the counties by thousands of counties I think it was 2,800 to 500" - This statement contains several inaccuracies:

  • Trump did not win the popular vote in either 2016 or the implied election year.

  • The county win margin may be inaccurate and requires verification against official election results.

• 9:04 - "the interest rates just the interest on the national debt now exceeds the defense department spending we spend a lot on the defense department but we're spending like over a trillion dollars on interest" - Requires verification against official budget figures for national debt interest and defense spending.

• 10:48 - "for example with uh usaid uh one of the things we accidentally canceled very briefly was Ebola Ebola prevention I think we all want ebol prevention so we restored the theol prevention immediately and there was no interruption" - This needs verification from USAID records to confirm the brief cancellation and immediate restoration without interruption.

• 13:40 - "we think there are a number of people under govern payroll who are uh dead which is probably why they can't respond" - This statement is potentially true but would require substantial evidence to support it.

Important Considerations:

• Context is Key: The accuracy of some statements depends on the specific context of the meeting and the time period being discussed.

• Subjectivity: Some statements are opinions or projections, which cannot be definitively fact-checked.

• Verifying Numbers: Claims involving specific numbers (budget figures, election results, etc.) should be checked against official government sources and reputable databases.