Post from Truth Social

Same afternoon, same sentences

This is the second Pennsylvania House endorsement of the afternoon, and its middle paragraph is the Scott Perry post with the names swapped. Both run "is a Radical Left [Dumocrat/Democrat] who is opposed to" the same three capitalized tax slogans, then "if [she/he] and the Dumocrats ever got in, all of these things will be terminated." The one visible seam is the party label. Stelson got "Dumocrat," Brooks gets "Radical Left Democrat," and the next clause goes back to "the Dumocrats." That looks like a template with one slot filled by hand. The same-day David Stumbo endorsement opens with the same "America First Patriot" tag.

The post went up at 3:14 p.m. Eastern (daylight time runs through November 1), five days before the November 3 midterm, as part of a batch. The plank list in paragraph two ("Grow the Economy, Create Jobs, Cut Taxes and Regulations, Keep our Border SECURE, Stop Migrant Crime...") is the stock list from his 2026 endorsements. It never cites a vote Mackenzie cast, so the praise can't be read as a judgment of his record. It is the same praise any loyal incumbent gets. The close, "GET OUT AND VOTE FOR RYAN — HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!", the third-person signature "President DONALD J. TRUMP," and the swampthevoteusa.com get-out-the-vote link are campaign boilerplate. Staff put this post together from approved parts. The parts themselves were cut from his vocabulary: "Dumocrats," the capitalized nouns, "Complete and Total Endorsement."

How the post sorts people

The post has two halves, praise and then attack. Mackenzie is "an America First Patriot," "doing an incredible job," "fighting tirelessly." Brooks is "Reckless, Radical, and Dangerous!" The same adjectives went to Perry and Stelson an hour earlier, so the split tells us nothing about either man. It is splitting built into the genre, and Brooks did nothing to set it off. Status flows one way: "Ryan Mackenzie has my Complete and Total Endorsement" makes the endorser the source of the candidate's standing. The cast here is a kingmaker handing out legitimacy. Communion shows up only as an address to "the Great People of Pennsylvania's 7th Congressional District," and that is instrumental.

The fear section loads four positions onto Brooks: "massive Tax Increases, Open Borders, Men playing in Women's Sports, and Transgender Mutilization of your Children." The last one carries the most charge. The second-person "your Children" puts the threat inside the reader's own home, and "Mutilization" recasts a medical practice as bodily injury. That nonstandard form recurs word for word across this endorsement template, so here it is a fixed part. Nobody produced it fresh today, and it cannot be read as a paraphasia. "Protect our always under siege Second Amendment" sets up a permanent siege that never names who is besieging. The order offered is restorative: borders, taxes, children and gun rights, all protected from a "Radical Left" that gets cast as the source of disorder.

The one action the post asks for is a vote. The transgender line is the only part with the shape that worries in other contexts: a group cast as harming children. Here it is tied to a ballot instruction and aimed at a named candidate's supposed policy preferences. It points at no people to be acted against.

The tax promise does not hold up

The one concrete stake the post gives voters is that three tax breaks exist and that Democrats would "terminate" them. The 2025 reconciliation law created deductions: up to $25,000 for qualified tips, up to $12,500 ($25,000 joint) for qualified overtime premium pay, and an extra $6,000 deduction for filers 65 and older. All three expire after 2028. None of them removes tax on Social Security. Benefits stay taxable under the existing formula, and the senior deduction applies whether or not the filer collects benefits. Expiry is written into the statute Republicans passed. A Democratic House also could not repeal them over a presidential veto he holds until January 2029, which is after the 2028 sunset. The sentence about Brooks's position was copied from the Stelson endorsement with only the pronouns changed, so it says nothing about anything Brooks has said or done.

Fact Verification

FactCheck.org (Oct. 8, 2026, "Misleading GOP Attacks Over Taxes on Tips, Overtime, Social Security") looked at a Safety and Affordability PAC ad saying Brooks "wants to keep higher taxes on overtime pay and Social Security benefits." It put that ad among Republican attacks it called misleading, noting that "opposition to the OBBBA doesn't necessarily translate to an opposition" to those tax cuts. Brooks has never served in Congress, so he has cast no vote on any of these provisions.

The claim does have a basis. In a May 2026 Meidas Touch podcast appearance, Brooks dismissed Republican talk about the overtime break: "I just don't understand how they keep spewing the garbage." He was arguing that about 90% of firefighters don't benefit from it. The NRCC (Sept. 9, 2026) turned that into "Brooks called giving Pennsylvania workers a tax cut garbage." Fox also reported that his website said he would "work to repeal" the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to restore SNAP funding, and that law contains all three breaks. Spotlight PA (Sept. 30, 2026) quotes him calling the OBBBA "God-awful" and saying he wants to "bring back everything that was cut." That reads as restoring the Medicaid and SNAP cuts, not reversing the tax deductions.

I found no Brooks statement on the $6,000 senior deduction (the "no tax on Social Security" item) either way, and his campaign's answer to FactCheck.org didn't address it. That deduction does not actually eliminate federal tax on Social Security benefits; it is a temporary deduction for people 65 and older through 2028.

The post's wording is also identical to Trump's same-day endorsement against a different Democrat (Janelle Stelson, PA-10), apart from names and pronouns, which points to a template rather than anything specific to Brooks. Overall, the claim contradicts his campaign's stated support for no tax on tips and overtime. It rests on his opposition to the larger bill and on one podcast remark, and nothing supports it for Social Security. | | "Brooks wants massive tax increases, open borders, men in women's sports and 'Transgender Mutilization of your Children'" | Mostly False | This claim bundles four characterizations. Only the first has partial support.

Tax increases: partly supported, but "massive" and the implied broad scope are not. Spotlight PA (Sept. 30, 2026) reports that Brooks's platform includes raising the corporate tax rate and repealing the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which he says "handed massive breaks to billionaires and big corporations." It also says he backs the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act, which would make high-income earners pay more into Social Security and Medicare. PoliticsPA (Oct. 27, 2026) quotes his priorities as "Fair taxes for the rich. No more free rides for billionaires and big corporations" and "Pass a billionaire minimum tax." So he does want higher taxes on corporations and high earners. Nothing shows him proposing broad tax increases on ordinary workers, and his campaign says he supports the tips and overtime deductions.

Open borders: contradicted by his own statements. Armchair Lehigh Valley (Oct. 15, 2026) reports that Brooks wants an immigration system that deters illegal entry, secures the border, treats people humanely, and gives law-abiding immigrants a path to citizenship. He also says ICE should return to targeting drug dealers and other criminals who enter illegally. He criticizes masked ICE arrests ("we don't send masked men to kidnap people off the street"), but that is not an open-borders position.

Men in women's sports and "transgender mutilization" of children: no supporting record found. The Philadelphia Gay News 2026 LGBTQ+ voter guide (Oct. 21, 2026) says Brooks backs anti-discrimination laws and marriage equality and tells Republicans to stop "bullying kids." It also says he "has not made tangible campaign promises" to LGBTQ+ people or explicitly discussed trans inclusion in sports or access to medical care. The Inquirer (Sept. 8, 2026) describes him as running on economic populism while "avoiding culture war issues." I found no ad, statement or interview where Brooks takes a position on transgender athletes or gender-affirming care for minors. "Mutilization" is a pejorative characterization, not a checkable policy position.

The same phrases appear word for word in Trump's other same-day endorsements against different Democrats, which suggests a template rather than Brooks's record. One element (higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations) is grounded but exaggerated, one (open borders) contradicts his stated position, and two have no support in anything he has said. |

Overall Veracity: 36%