Listen to the article
In a tense White House exchange Monday, President Donald Trump falsely denied making a statement about releasing military footage that he had clearly made on camera just five days earlier, then launched into a personal attack against the reporter who accurately quoted him.
The incident centered around video footage of controversial U.S. military strikes on September 2 against a suspected drug-smuggling boat in the Caribbean. While the military publicly released video of the initial strike, footage of a follow-up strike—in which survivors from the first attack were targeted—has only been shown to members of Congress behind closed doors.
During a December 3 White House press briefing, ABC News reporter Selina Wang asked Trump if he would release the second video to the public. “I don’t know what they have, but whatever they have we’d certainly release, no problem,” Trump responded at the time, clearly indicating his openness to making the footage available.
However, when ABC News reporter Rachel Scott referenced this statement during Monday’s press event, Trump immediately contradicted his own recorded words. “I didn’t say that. That’s – you said that, I didn’t say that. This is ABC fake news,” Trump claimed, despite video evidence to the contrary.
Scott attempted to continue her question, noting that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had indicated the potential release of the video was under review. She asked Trump if he was ordering Hegseth to release the footage. Trump replied, “Whatever he decides is okay with me,” seemingly backing away from his earlier commitment to transparency on the matter.
The president then pivoted to defending the military strikes themselves, repeating his frequently disputed claim that each boat destroyed saves “25,000 American lives.” He justified the controversial follow-up strike by claiming the survivors “were trying to turn the boat back to where it could float, and we didn’t want to see that, because that boat was loaded up with drugs.”
When Scott tried to redirect the conversation back to the question of releasing the video, Trump escalated his personal attack, calling her “the most obnoxious reporter in the whole place” and “actually a terrible reporter.” This confrontational response to factual questioning follows a pattern that has characterized many of Trump’s interactions with the press.
Following the exchange, ABC News colleague Jonathan Karl defended Scott on social media, writing on X (formerly Twitter) that she had “quoted President Trump accurately.”
This incident adds to what media observers have documented as a pattern of Trump falsely denying statements he has made publicly. The controversy highlights ongoing tensions surrounding military operations in the Caribbean and raises questions about transparency regarding U.S. military actions against suspected drug traffickers.
The September 2 operation has drawn particular scrutiny because of the decision to conduct a second strike against survivors of the initial attack. While the Trump administration has framed these operations as necessary components of anti-narcotics efforts, human rights organizations have raised concerns about the tactics employed.
The administration’s selective release of footage—showing the first strike but withholding video of the more controversial follow-up attack—has prompted calls for greater transparency from both journalists and some members of Congress who have viewed the complete footage.
As this situation develops, the contradiction between Trump’s initial statement and his subsequent denial underscores broader questions about accountability in military operations and the public’s right to access information about actions taken in their name.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


17 Comments
Interesting update on Fact Check: Trump Denies Statement Captured on Video Five Days Earlier. Curious how the grades will trend next quarter.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
If AISC keeps dropping, this becomes investable for me.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Nice to see insider buying—usually a good signal in this space.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Exploration results look promising, but permitting will be the key risk.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.
The cost guidance is better than expected. If they deliver, the stock could rerate.
Good point. Watching costs and grades closely.