72%
IsItCap Score
Truth Potential MeterGenerally Credible
ChatGPT Grade
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
21%
Perplexity Grade
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
92%
Google Gemini Grade
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
20%
Generally Credible
Based on what we could find, the claim that a secret White House spreadsheet ranks companies by loyalty to Trump is strongly supported by multiple credible mainstream sources such as Axios, Common Dreams, and Benzinga. These outlets report with detailed insider information that the Trump White House created and circulated among senior staff a scorecard evaluating over 500 companies on their support for key Trump policies, especially the One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3). The grades given reflect the claims strong factual basis and consistent corroboration across independent mainstream media.
The strongest evidence comes from Axios and Common Dreams, which cite senior White House officials and insiders confirming the spreadsheets existence, the use of public metrics like social media posts, press releases, ads, and attendance at White House events to rate companies, and the practical use of the data to influence government dealings. The inclusion of named major corporations such as Uber, DoorDash, and AT&T further substantiates the claims credibility. However, the claims context includes significant limitations and implications.
Alternative sources highlight ethical, legal, and political concerns about the spreadsheet as a tool for coercion and retaliation, potentially undermining democratic norms and corporate independence. These critiques emphasize the authoritarian overreach and constitutional questions raised by government enforcement of political loyalty in the private sector, adding layers of complexity to the claims interpretation. Additional nuances emerge from whistleblower accounts and investigative journalism outside mainstream outlets, which provide corroborative leaked documents and testimonies about punitive measures against companies that do not publicly support Trump.
These sources align with the mainstream narrative on the spreadsheets existence but deepen understanding of its operational risks and consequences. The final verdict is that the claim is substantially true, supported by a convergence of credible sources confirming the spreadsheets existence and function. Nevertheless, the claim also opens a broader debate about the ethical and legal ramifications of such a loyalty ranking system, marking it as a significant and controversial element of governance under Trumps administration.
Common Dreams
White House Scorecard Rates Companies Based on How ...
Reports reveal that the Trump White House has created an internal spreadsheet rating over 500 companies and trade groups on their loyalty and support for Trump's policies, especially the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' (OB3). The rating considers various public and event engagement metrics and categorizes companies as strong, moderate, or low supporters. The list is circulated among senior staff and may influence government dealings with corporations.
Axios
Scoop: White House loyalty rating for companies
Axios reports that the Trump administration has developed a scorecard rating 553 companies and trade associations on how actively they support the 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' The ranking influences senior White House staff decisions on corporate requests. Criteria include public endorsements and participation in related events.
Benzinga
White House Rates 553 firms on support for Trump policies
Benzinga confirms the White House's creation of a scorecard assessing 553 companies on their loyalty to Trump’s policies, including OB3 and others. The scorecard uses public engagement metrics and attendance at White House events. Companies are rated strong, moderate, or low and the list is circulated internally to influence policy and corporate interaction.
Substack - Independent Political Commentary
Opinion: White House loyalty scorecard is authoritarian overreach
This alternative commentary critiques the loyalty spreadsheet as a tool of authoritarian control, arguing it represents government overreach and coercion of corporations to publicly support Trump. It highlights concerns about potential retaliation against dissenting companies and the implications for democratic norms.
Law and Policy Journal Blog
Analysis: White House loyalty ratings raise ethical and legal questions
This academic blog analyzes the legal and ethical ramifications of the White House's loyalty ratings, questioning the legality of government retaliation against companies based on political loyalty. It suggests the practice may violate constitutional protections and corporate rights.
Independent investigative journalism site
Corporate loyalty scorecard: a sign of a crumbling democratic process
This investigative piece argues that the loyalty spreadsheet is part of a broader pattern of democratic erosion under Trump, with government tools increasingly used to enforce political loyalty in the private sector. It includes whistleblower accounts and leaked documents supporting claims of internal enforcement and retribution.
Get an in-depth analysis of content accuracy, source credibility, potential biases, contextual factors, claim origins, and hidden perspectives that might influence the overall assessment.
Our advanced algorithms systematically gather and analyze sources both supporting and challenging the claim, evaluating:
Our multi-layered algorithms work together to provide a balanced, in-depth evaluation of every claim:
Each factor contributes to the final credibility score through a weighted algorithm that prioritizes factual accuracy and source reliability while considering contextual factors and potential biases. The system is designed to provide a comprehensive assessment that reflects both the veracity of the claim and the quality of supporting evidence.
We trace the claim's origins and examine the broader context in which it emerged.
Our analysis uncovers less obvious perspectives and potential interpretations.
We identify and analyze potential biases in source materials and narratives.
While our analysis strives for maximum accuracy, we recommend using this report as part of a broader fact-checking toolkit.