Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the sources of the Trump poop video claim?
Executive Summary
The core, verifiable claim is that President Donald Trump shared an AI-generated video depicting him piloting a jet and dropping feces on participants in the nationwide “No Kings” protests; multiple mainstream outlets reported the post and characterized the clip as synthetic [1] [2] [3] [4]. Coverage dates cluster in mid-to-late October 2025, and reporting converges on two points: the clip was created with generative techniques and it was amplified from pro-Trump social accounts to the president’s Truth Social feed, provoking both defenses and condemnation [4] [5] [6]. Key unresolved elements across the reporting are the original creator or chain of custody for the clip and the extent to which official accounts coordinated its circulation; journalists and experts note this episode as part of a broader surge of politically motivated AI content that complicates attribution and accountability [2] [7].
1. How multiple outlets documented the same shocking image — and what they agree on
News organizations independently documented that President Trump’s account reshared an AI-crafted “poop plane” video visualizing him dropping brown sludge or feces on anti-Trump demonstrators during the “No Kings” actions. NBC News described the clip as AI-generated and reported that Trump has repeatedly amplified synthetic videos on his feed over months [1]. CNN discussed the episode as emblematic of a coarsening political media environment and described the clip as AI-created, placing the act in the context of evolving online norms [2]. Newsweek and other outlets provided parallel descriptions, noting recognizable figures or influencers appearing in the clip and flagging the unauthorized use of music that prompted artist complaints [3]. These independent accounts unify on the video’s AI origin and its sharing by the president, rather than presenting it as a factual real-world event.
2. The claimed sourcing and distribution chain — what reporters found and what remains opaque
Reporting cites an initial appearance of the clip on pro-Trump social accounts before the president reshared it, with at least one byline indicating a pro-Trump account named Xerias as an origin point for circulation; outlets described Trump’s account amplifying content created elsewhere [4]. Journalists noted that the clip incorporated actual protest footage as background material, but overlaid it with AI-generated imagery of a jet and excrement, signaling a composite creation rather than a single-source recording [4] [6]. Despite these leads, none of the summaries provide a definitive, independently verified chain proving which individual or organization generated the clip, and they stop short of identifying forensic metadata or creator confession. The lack of a confirmed origin is a substantive gap in the public record that reporters explicitly flagged.
3. Reactions and secondary evidence: artists, influencers, and politicians weigh in
The video’s soundtrack and depicted subjects produced public responses that served as corroborative color: musician Kenny Loggins publicly asked for removal after his song “Danger Zone” was used without permission, while influencers mentioned in the clip posted reactions on X and TikTok, and senators publicly criticized the president’s decision to repost it [1] [3]. Vice President JD Vance and other supporters defended or downplayed the clip per some outlets, while critics described it as inflammatory and unbecoming of a sitting president [5]. These reactions do not alter the technical classification of the clip as AI-generated, but they provide contemporaneous, verifiable acknowledgments that the video circulated widely and prompted engagement from named public figures, which bolsters the reporting that the post occurred even as creator attribution remains unresolved [3] [5].
4. The broader pattern: AI deepfakes, prior examples and why that matters here
Fact-checking and media analysis over 2024–2025 show a rising prevalence of sophisticated deepfakes and AI-assembled videos used in political contexts; France 24’s July 2025 examination of an AI-generated video falsely showing Trump at an Epstein-related event demonstrated how synthetic clips can be seeded from real images and rapidly spread [7]. Analysts cited in mainstream coverage framed the “poop plane” episode as a logical extension of that trend: composites that splice real protest footage with generated elements amplify plausibility while remaining false in their depiction [2]. The existence of prior, debunked AI fabrications makes the classification of the Trump clip as AI-produced more consequential, because it underscores both the lowered evidentiary weight of viral video and the increased difficulty of tracing authorship or intent.
5. What the assembled record proves, what it does not, and the outstanding evidentiary needs
The assembled reporting proves that an AI-generated video depicting Trump dumping feces on protesters was publicly shared by pro-Trump accounts and reshared on the president’s platform in October 2025, triggering artist complaints and political pushback [1] [3] [4]. The record does not conclusively identify the original creator, nor does it provide forensic metadata in the published accounts; journalists note the absence of a verified provenance trail [4]. To move from credible reportage to definitive attribution, investigators would need forensic file traces, platform takedown logs, or admission by the producing party—evidence not present in the cited coverage. The episode fits a broader, verifiable pattern of politically instrumentalized AI content that raises accountability and platform-moderation questions highlighted across these reports [2] [7].