What is Serge Kovaleski’s account of his interactions with Donald Trump before and after the 2015 incident?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Serge Kovaleski says he and Donald Trump knew each other from reporting in the late 1980s — “on a first-name basis” with roughly a dozen face-to-face encounters including interviews in Trump’s office and at press conferences — and he has repeatedly rejected Trump’s later claim that they did not know one another [1] [2] [3]. After Trump’s November 2015 rally gesture that many interpreted as mocking Kovaleski’s arthrogryposis, Kovaleski issued a written response disputing Trump’s use of his 2001 reporting and described his own recollection of the underlying facts; colleagues and contemporaneous reporting broadly corroborate his account of prior interactions [4] [3] [5].
1. Pre-2015: “On a first-name basis” — Kovaleski’s account of earlier encounters
Kovaleski has told multiple outlets that while he worked at the New York Daily News in the late 1980s he covered Trump’s business and interviewed him in person a number of times, saying “Donald and I were on a first-name basis for years” and estimating about a dozen interactions — interviews in Trump’s office and questions at press conferences — an account repeated to The New York Times, CNNMoney and other outlets [2] [1] [3]. That description is consistent with contemporaneous reportage that places Kovaleski covering Trump between roughly 1987 and 1993 and with colleagues who have said Kovaleski’s appearance and prior contacts with Trump would be memorable [6] [5].
2. The 2015 rally: what Kovaleski says happened and why he pushed back
When Trump, defending a claim about post‑9/11 celebrations in New Jersey, pointed to a 2001 Washington Post article co‑authored by Kovaleski and then mimicked a flailing posture onstage, Kovaleski publicly objected to Trump’s portrayal and to the campaign’s characterization of his reporting; Kovaleski said he did not remember anyone describing “thousands or even hundreds” celebrating and issued a written statement challenging the campaign’s use of his work as independent proof [4] [3]. Trump responded by saying he did not know Kovaleski and denying he was mocking a disability, but Kovaleski’s account of having met Trump repeatedly directly contradicted those denials [7] [8].
3. After the incident: written statements, media interviews, and corroboration
In the immediate aftermath Kovaleski gave the same basic account to multiple outlets — that he’d met Trump in earlier reporting and that his 2001 article did not support Trump’s claim about mass celebrations — and he issued a written statement clarifying his memory of the Post story’s contents; contemporaries and former colleagues backed his contention that he had been identifiable to anyone who had met him [4] [5] [8]. Major news organizations documented both his version of past interactions and his statement about what the 2001 reporting actually said, and these accounts were widely cited as undermining the campaign’s defense [3] [6].
4. Alternative narratives and points of dispute
The Trump campaign and the candidate himself portrayed the episode differently, asserting unfamiliarity with Kovaleski’s appearance and arguing the gesture was not meant to mimic a disability but to depict “groveling” or a person backtracking; the campaign also leaned on the 2001 Post story as relevant background rather than on personal acquaintance [3] [4]. Some defenders pointed to other gestures Trump has used in public, suggesting a pattern of imitating “flustered” opponents rather than targeting disability specifically — a line of argument noted in conservative commentary — but those claims do not negate Kovaleski’s consistent recounting of their prior meetings nor the contemporaneous corroboration from colleagues [9] [5].
5. Bottom line: what Kovaleski says he experienced before and after 2015
Kovaleski’s account is straightforward and consistent across interviews and a written statement: he had a known, repeated reporting relationship with Trump in the late 1980s and, after Trump’s 2015 rally gesture and public denials, he rebutted both the campaign’s use of his 2001 article and Trump’s claim of unfamiliarity by restating his direct interactions and clarifying what his earlier reporting did — and did not — say [2] [4] [3]. Reporting and on‑the‑record colleagues broadly corroborate his version of past interactions even as alternative interpretations of Trump’s gesture and intent persisted in public debate [5] [9].