Are there any photos or videos of Donald Trump's ear injury?

1. What visual evidence exists from the Butler, PA shooting

Photographs and video taken at the rally capture the moment of the attack and its immediate aftermath, including images described as showing Trump with blood on his face and touching his ear while shots were fired; subsequent public appearances contained photos of him wearing a gauze or flesh‑colored bandage over his right ear ^{[1] [5]}. News outlets reported that those post‑attack images were used in coverage and noted New York and national media published photographs from the scene and from later appearances with visible bandaging ^{[1] [5]}.

2. Campaign statements and medical narrative

Trump’s campaign released an account from his physician saying the wound was from a high‑powered rifle that grazed the top of his right ear and came “less than a quarter of an inch from entering his head,” and that initial care included evaluation at Butler Memorial Hospital and a CT scan; the campaign also said the wound’s blunt nature did not require sutures ^[1]. Those campaign statements accompanied photos showing a flesh‑colored bandage during a post‑attack rally appearance ^[1].

3. Old photos and conspiracy claims: what got recycled online

Multiple debunking outlets found that at least two images circulated as “proof” the shooting was faked actually predate the July 2024 attack: one image traced to a September 17, 2022 rally (credited to Reuters) and another to earlier events in 2017 or 2022 depending on the claim. Fact‑checkers concluded these older photos were misrepresented when used to assert there was “nothing wrong” with Trump’s ear ^{[2] [3] [4] [5]}. Full Fact, AP, Reuters, DW, and other checkers all flagged the reuse of archive images to cast doubt on the injury ^{[2] [3] [4] [5]}.

4. How credible are the “no injury” photo claims?

Independent fact‑checks explicitly refute the claim that a circulated image of Trump without visible ear damage proved the shooting was staged: AP and Reuters identified the image as a 2022 file photo, and DW and Full Fact summarized how reuse of archival pictures fueled misinformation ^{[2] [3] [5] [4]}. These fact‑checks do not rely on campaign statements alone; they document the provenance of specific images and show the timeline mismatch that undercuts the “no injury” narrative ^{[2] [3]}.

5. Open questions and limitations in available reporting

Available sources confirm there are contemporaneous photos and videos showing bleeding and later bandaging, and that older images were reused to deny the injury ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Sources do not provide every available original video or a full catalog of raw footage from the event; for example, searchable raw surveillance, long‑form bodycam, or unedited camera archives are not mentioned in these items (not found in current reporting). Medical records beyond the campaign physician’s summary and publicly released images are not included in the cited sources ^[1].

6. Why this matters: misinformation dynamics and context

The reuse of dated photos to challenge a high‑profile injury illustrates a common misinformation pattern: archival content is repurposed to fit a narrative, then amplified on social platforms ^{[2] [3] [5]}. Fact‑checkers highlighted that the presence of legitimate post‑attack photos and campaign medical details contradict attempts to dismiss the wound as faked; readers should weigh provenance and date stamps when evaluating such visual claims ^{[2] [3] [1]}.

Summary conclusion: Visual evidence from the Butler shooting and subsequent public appearances showing a bloodied face and later a bandaged ear was published and reported; claims that Trump’s ear was uninjured rely on older, misdated photos that fact‑checkers have debunked ^{[1] [2] [3]}.