claimpit
← All receipts
Fact-Checker/Videos
Video fact-check

'Show Me The Verse' - Mehdi CORNERS Pastor Doug Wilson

6 claims checked · Published August 2026 · Checked August 2026

Checked by an AI model against live web sources — how this works · report an error

Watch on YouTube Jump to claims ↓
The map

Who said what, and about what

A bounded sample, most disputed claims first — the full list is belowEvery row is reachable by scrolling its column · search matches claim text, verdicts, people, topics and sources · hover a row to trace its chain, click one to pin its detail

The receipts

Every claim, checked

  1. Claim 1
    Unverifiable50% confidence▶ 0:02
    “there's no mention of God, Jesus, the Bible, Christianity, faith anywhere in the Constitution. Zero. Nada. Zilch.”

    The Constitution contains no mention of God, Jesus, the Bible, Christianity, or faith.

    The operative constitutional text does not use any of the listed terms. However, it does mention religion, including in Article VI's prohibition on religious tests and the First Amendment's religion clauses; that does not contradict the narrower list stated here.

    Checked twice, independently: the first pass returned Accurate and the second Unverifiable. Recorded as Unverifiable.

    Sources

  2. Claim 2
    False99% confidence▶ 0:11
    “It was No, it was passed and signed in the year of our Lord. 1789.”

    The Constitution was passed and signed in 1789.

    The National Archives identifies the document as signed on September 17, 1787. The year 1789 relates to the beginning of the new federal government and the First Congress, not the Constitution’s signing.

    Sources

    • 1Constitution of the United States (1787)

      RefutesDrafted in secret by delegates to the Constitutional Convention during the summer of 1787, this four-page document, signed on September 17, 1787, established the government of the United States.

  3. Claim 3
    Accurate99% confidence▶ 0:17
    “1787. But that's the date that is on the bottom of the document.”

    The date 1787 appears at the bottom of the Constitution document.

    The Constitution’s closing attestation dates the document September 17, 1787, and the National Archives identifies the signed document as a 1787 document.

    Sources

    • 1Constitution of the United States (1787)

      SupportsDrafted in secret by delegates to the Constitutional Convention during the summer of 1787, this four-page document, signed on September 17, 1787, established the government of the United States.

    • 2In Defense of the Constitution’s Attestation Clause

      SupportsOn the engrossed Constitution, it reads: done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independance of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.

  4. Claim 4
    Unverifiable50% confidence▶ 0:45
    “As it turns out, the our Lord clause is not part of the official legal constitution. The official Constitution's text ends just before these extra words of attestation, extra words that were not ratified by various state conventions in 1787 and 1788.”

    The “Year of our Lord” attestation clause is not part of the official legal Constitution and was not ratified by the state conventions.

    There is substantial evidence supporting the speaker’s position: the attestation was omitted from several state ratification instruments, and a scholarly consensus described in the Dartmouth Law Journal regards it as outside the legal text. However, the same journal article expressly rejects that conclusion, making the legal-status question contested rather than settled.

    The checker returned Contested but cited only one institution for both sides of the dispute, so this is recorded as unverifiable.

    Checked twice, independently: the first pass returned Unverifiable and the second Accurate. Recorded as Unverifiable.

    Sources

  5. Claim 5
    Accurate97% confidence▶ 1:34
    “the system of checks and balances. The the system of uh des um designated powers. the system of uh federal jurisdiction where the states have some and the people have some and the federal government has some.”

    The Constitution establishes checks and balances and divides authority among the federal government, the states, and the people.

    Congress’s Constitution Annotated describes the Constitution as creating checks and balances among three federal branches and federalism as dividing power between national and state governments. The Tenth Amendment expressly reserves undelegated powers to the states or the people.

    Sources

    • 1Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances

      SupportsWhile the Constitution largely effectuated these principles, the Framers’ separation of power was not rigid, but incorporated a system of checks and balances whereby one branch could check the powers assigned to another.

    • 2Federalism and the Constitution

      SupportsAnother basic concept embodied in the Constitution is federalism, which refers to the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments.

    • 3Tenth Amendment | Constitution Annotated

      SupportsThe powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  6. Claim 6
    Misleading50% confidence▶ 1:58
    “They got it from Montescu and John Lock. These are enlightenment ideas.”

    The constitutional ideas under discussion came from Montesquieu and John Locke and were Enlightenment ideas.

    Montesquieu and Locke were important Enlightenment influences on American constitutional thought: official constitutional scholarship links Montesquieu to separation of powers and identifies Locke as an influential source of founding-era political ideas. But the wording suggests that all of the listed institutional features came directly from those two thinkers, which is an overstatement.

    Omits: The statement omits other important sources, including English constitutional practice, classical republican thought, and the framers’ own state-constitution experience; it also overstates the evidence by attributing the entire set of ideas, including bicameralism and the veto, simply to Locke and Montesquieu.

    Checked twice, independently: the first pass returned Misleading and the second Accurate. Recorded as Misleading.

    Sources