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.
Have fact-checkers (AP, Reuters, Snopes) investigated claims about Donald Trump wearing a catheter in 2024?
Executive Summary
Multiple fact-checking outlets have examined specific claims that Donald Trump was wearing a catheter during public appearances, but their findings are mixed: Reuters debunked a fabricated Truth Social post about incontinence, while Snopes reviewed photographs from a June 2025 UFC appearance and found no conclusive evidence of a catheter; other outlets reported the White House denial and noted continued online speculation [1] [2]. The overall record shows fact-checkers addressed discrete viral claims but did not reach a definitive, universally corroborated conclusion that Trump wore a catheter in 2024. Conflicting social-media narratives and limited visual evidence leave the issue unresolved in the public record [3] [4].
1. Why fact-checkers stepped in: viral images versus satire — what was actually investigated
Fact-checkers intervened first when a widely shared screenshot purported to show a Truth Social post by Trump about “incontinence issues”; Reuters established that screenshot was fabricated and traced it to satire, concluding the post did not exist on Trump’s account [1]. That investigation illustrates how misleading imagery and manufactured posts can seed medical rumors quickly, prompting verification. Separately, Snopes and some other outlets took up a later visual claim tied to a real public appearance — photographs and video from a UFC event — and treated that as a distinct line of inquiry, looking at the footage for signs of tubing or a bulge under clothing [2] [3]. Those two different fact-checks addressed different phenomena: one a fabricated social-media post, the other a visual rumor tied to real-time images, explaining why coverage appears fragmented.
2. Snopes’ close look at UFC photos: inconclusive but skeptical about a catheter claim
Snopes examined multiple angles and videos from the UFC 316 appearance in June 2025 and found that while observers saw a shadow or line on the pants, the evidence did not clearly show tubing or a catheter; Snopes noted similar shadows on both legs and explored lighting and fabric folds as plausible explanations [2]. The White House publicly denied the claim, with spokesperson Steven Cheung and the White House physician’s April 2025 medical report cited to assert the President was in strong health, which fact-checkers used as contextual counter-evidence [3] [2]. Snopes did not definitively confirm presence of a catheter and explicitly described the visual evidence as ambiguous, a crucial distinction that undercuts absolute assertions circulating online.
3. Reuters’ earlier debunking shows similar health rumors circulate via satire and fabrication
Reuters’ October 2024 fact-check targeted a different but related narrative: a fabricated Truth Social screenshot claiming Trump discussed incontinence. Reuters traced the image to satire and reported the creator’s admission, demonstrating how satirical or doctored content can seed persistent health rumors [1]. That debunk established an important precedent: misinformation about a public figure’s medical condition often arises from deliberate fabrication or miscontextualization, and reputable fact-checkers can and did trace such origins. Reuters’ clear refutation of a fabricated post contrasts with the more equivocal findings about photographic evidence from live events, highlighting the spectrum of evidentiary strength across incidents.
4. Media coverage and silence — where outlets diverged and why that matters
Some summaries and reports suggested that major fact-checkers like AP, Reuters, and Snopes had all fully investigated a single catheter claim; the record shows instead that different outlets looked at different items — satire images, event photos, and commentary — producing complementary but not identical conclusions [1] [4]. A handful of outlets noted the White House denial and prior medical clearance while also acknowledging continued public speculation. The divergence reflects both editorial choices and the limits of visual analysis: outlets will decisively debunk clear fabrications but remain cautious and highlight uncertainty when evidence is ambiguous, which can leave the public perceiving inconsistency even where fact-checkers are following standard verification protocols [1] [2].
5. What is missing from the public record and how future verification could close the loop
No publicly available, independently verifiable medical documentation or on-the-record admission confirms Trump wore a catheter in 2024; the strongest debunked element is the fabricated social-media post, while the photographic claim remains unresolved because still images and shadows cannot substitute for medical proof [1] [2]. Fact-checkers rely on verifiable primary sources and open records; absent an authoritative medical disclosure or corroborating material evidence, fact-checks will reasonably classify the visual claims as unproven or false depending on context. Closing this question would require a direct, verifiable source — medical documentation, a statement from qualified medical personnel with consent, or clearer visual evidence — none of which has been publicly produced according to the reviewed reports [4].