I have read the piece previously, and even used it in an article. So I have to look through the haystack because you are assuring me that there is a needle in there somewhere.
While the link generally supports the claim, I have two points. First fact checkers aren't very reliable (there is a great piece on this if you are interested from TheWeekly). Second, your link tends to support my claim, not dispute it.
There is a problem with "fact checkers". They are largely trying to referee a game of between ideologies where both sides are using data that doesn't make a lot of sense. In your link :
"Even if Bush "Even if Bush "borrowed" from the surplus, the amount is more like $708 billion, and the borrowing wasn’t earmarked for a special purposes. As for not "paying back," the bonds won’t need to be repaid until 2020."
Actually the vast majority of the borrow was "ear-marked" to pay interest on past borrowing. Of the $2.9 trillion held today, the system holds roughly $2 trillion in interest and interest on interest. This exposes the larger problem. Most of the actual excess cash that was borrowed, has been repaid. These bonds are held for a finite period of time up to 15 years before they are refinanced again. All of the borrowing by Clinton's Administration was repaid by 2015, with refinancing bonds issued by Bush and by Obama.
Did Bush or any president borrow money from Social Security?
Since I can't find your concern in the Politifact article, I will give you my article on the actual cashflows of the Trust Fund. Simply put, every penny of EXCESS CONTRIBUTION ever borrowed has been spent on one program : Social Security. Yes the program gets general fund subsidies. It may not sound interesting but it pretty much ends the discussion of the "raid" on Social Security.
https://www.fedsmith.com/2015/12/08/the-myth-of-the-missing-social-security-trust-fund/