Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Trump’s False Claims of Military Combat with Gang Members Debunked by Officials

President Donald Trump’s recent assertion that U.S. troops engaged in hand-to-hand combat with members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua on Washington D.C. streets has been categorically denied by military officials. This claim represents the latest in a series of demonstrably false statements the president has made regarding the deployment of troops in American cities.

During an address to hundreds of top military officers late last month, Trump vividly described an alleged confrontation: “We had gangs of Tren de Aragua, say 10, 12, 15 kids. And these military guys walk up to them, and they treat them with disrespect, and they just got pounded.” He further claimed the suspected gang members were “thrown into paddy wagons and taken back to their country.”

Joint Task Force–District of Columbia, which oversees military operations in the nation’s capital, flatly rejected these assertions. JTF–DC spokesperson Alexia Nal told The Intercept, “Nope. We’re not allowed to,” explaining that service members are prohibited from physically engaging with civilians. One defense official, speaking anonymously, characterized Trump’s claim as “obvious bullshit,” while other government officials expressed similar disbelief.

The White House did not respond to questions about the alleged assaults, whether the purported gang members were children, or if Trump was suggesting members were transported directly to Venezuela.

Trump’s fabricated combat narrative parallels his equally false claims about crime elimination in Washington since troops began their occupation in August. “D.C. is now a no — it’s a free crime city. We have no crime in D.C. … It took me 12 days,” Trump declared last month. He repeated these claims more recently, stating: “We’ve got no crime. It took 12 days to solve the problem.”

Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson Ebony Major directly contradicted this assertion, stating plainly: “Yes, there has been crime. I mean, there’s crime everywhere.” The department’s website regularly documents ongoing criminal activity, including two homicides announced in press releases just last week.

Beyond Washington, Trump has deployed or attempted to deploy troops to Los Angeles, Memphis, New Orleans, Chicago, and Portland, Oregon. Federal judges have increasingly pushed back against these actions. Last month, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled the Los Angeles occupation illegal, noting there was “no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.”

Similar rulings have blocked proposed military occupations in Portland and Chicago. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut wrote that Trump’s determination was “simply untethered to the facts,” while District Judge April Perry stated the administration’s “perceptions are not reliable.”

The president has also threatened military deployment to Baltimore, New York City, Oakland, St. Louis, San Francisco, and Seattle, despite falling crime rates and opposition from local officials. “We’re going to go city by city,” he said earlier this month. “We’re going to have safe cities.”

Hanna Homestead of the National Priorities Project, a nonpartisan research group, noted Trump’s approach follows a familiar pattern. “All authoritarian regimes frame ruthlessly oppressive social control and militarization as necessary for public safety,” she told The Intercept. The D.C. deployment alone is estimated to cost approximately $1 million per day.

Trump’s justifications have consistently relied on hyperbole and misrepresentation. He has called protesters in Los Angeles “animals” and “a foreign enemy,” described Portland as “war-ravaged,” and falsely claimed Washington D.C.’s homicide rate exceeds “the worst places on Earth.”

His fixation on Tren de Aragua follows earlier administration attempts to invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act for fast-track deportations of alleged gang members. Last month, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked this effort, with Judge Leslie Southwick writing, “We conclude that the findings do not support that an invasion or a predatory incursion has occurred.”

Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s national security project, summed up the situation: “President Trump’s false and inflammatory justifications for deploying federal agents and National Guard troops to vibrant American cities may keep shifting, but the truth does not. There’s simply no emergency to justify deploying federal forces to Washington D.C. or any other city the president wrongly paints as a hellscape.”

Experts believe Trump’s fearmongering about American cities serves to galvanize support for increasingly authoritarian policies. “The more people believe that violence is rampant, the more power he can accrue under the guise of national security,” said Sara Haghdoosti, executive director of Win Without War.

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.

16 Comments

  1. Bizarre claims from the former president. Military officials have clearly refuted any involvement of US troops in confronting civilian gangs. We should rely on facts and credible sources, not unsubstantiated statements.

    • Elizabeth Z. Davis on

      Agreed. Spreading false information, especially about military operations, is irresponsible and undermines public trust. The focus should be on factual reporting, not political posturing.

  2. While I appreciate the former president’s efforts to address public safety concerns, these claims do not align with the official accounts. I hope we can move past political posturing and focus on evidence-based solutions.

    • James N. Jones on

      Agreed. Maintaining trust in our government and military institutions should be a priority, not divisive rhetoric. A fact-based approach is crucial for effective policymaking.

  3. It’s concerning to see the former president making such unfounded assertions. Transparent and accountable governance is crucial, so I hope this gets properly investigated rather than swept under the rug.

    • Absolutely. Spreading misinformation, even by a former leader, should be taken seriously. The public deserves the truth, not empty rhetoric.

  4. Jennifer U. Thomas on

    It’s disappointing to see the former president continue to make unsubstantiated claims. Responsible governance requires leaders to uphold the truth and respect the rule of law, even in the face of political pressure.

  5. Oliver U. Moore on

    This sounds like another attempt to distort reality for political gain. I’m glad the military has clearly refuted these claims. We need leaders who prioritize facts and national security over partisan narratives.

    • Exactly. Spreading misinformation, even by a former leader, should be taken seriously. The public deserves the truth, not empty rhetoric.

  6. I’m curious to know more about the context and motivation behind these statements. Are there any credible sources that can shed light on the situation? Transparency is key to understanding what actually occurred.

    • Good point. Responsible journalism should investigate this thoroughly and provide the public with a clear, factual account. Unsubstantiated claims, especially from former officials, deserve scrutiny.

  7. Noah Hernandez on

    While I appreciate the former president’s efforts to address public safety concerns, these claims do not align with the official accounts. I hope we can move past political posturing and focus on evidence-based solutions.

    • Agreed. Maintaining trust in our government and military institutions should be a priority, not divisive rhetoric. A fact-based approach is crucial for effective policymaking.

  8. I’m curious to know more about the context and motivation behind these statements. Are there any credible sources that can shed light on the situation? Transparency is key to understanding what actually occurred.

  9. This sounds like another attempt to distort reality for political gain. I’m glad the military has clearly refuted these claims. We need leaders who prioritize facts and national security over partisan narratives.

  10. It’s troubling to see continued attempts to spread misinformation, even long after leaving office. The public deserves leaders who respect the rule of law and the integrity of our institutions.

Leave A Reply

A professional organisation dedicated to combating disinformation through cutting-edge research, advanced monitoring tools, and coordinated response strategies.

Company

Disinformation Commission LLC
30 N Gould ST STE R
Sheridan, WY 82801
USA

© 2025 Disinformation Commission LLC. All rights reserved.